Waterfront Transit Reset Phase 1 Study

[jcam]

So many good ideas on this forum, I wish we could crowd-source more transit planning in this town!

In this case I can't see any benefit to extending Church St for cars. But extending the LRT tunnel east from Union under the Esplanade, with a stop at Church before turning south to Cooper St: that would make St Lawrence a lot more accessible to transit, as well as reaching Queen's Quay East in a pretty economical way.

Esplanade has the Backstage/L Tower pedestrian tunnel at the p3 level, so that one would be hard to manage. Below I threw all the current drawings together. Looks like 45 Bay contemplates a platform much further south than the original loop expansions.

Also, you could likely get an agreement to build a station in the basement level of 141 Bay, right behind the Dominion Building. I'm not sure the sewer situation on Yonge, but you might be able to bring a tunnel back down under the Gardiner and get to ground level by Harbour.

 

[zenmeister]

Esplanade has the Backstage/L Tower pedestrian tunnel at the p3 level, so that one would be hard to manage. Below I threw all the current drawings together. Looks like 45 Bay contemplates a platform much further south than the original loop expansions.

Also, you could likely get an agreement to build a station in the basement level of 141 Bay, right behind the Dominion Building. I'm not sure the sewer situation on Yonge, but you might be able to bring a tunnel back down under the Gardiner and get to ground level by Harbour.
View attachment 77330

My thoughts exactly

 

[44 North]

I understand that it's not easy to put up with several years of disruption, but I hate the idea that long term transportation infrastructure should be designed based on construction impact rather than what's best for moving people in a growing city. Should be also cancel plans to build the relief line on Queen Street because the streetcars will be affected? Was the inferior Scarborough subway a great idea just because it avoids an SRT shutdown? And what about all the Eglinton bus riders who are currently inconvenienced by the Crosstown?

That's all well and good, and I def grasp the concept of pain for gain. But if for some reason we shutter the 501 for several years (while choosing not to build the DRL during that time), then once service resumes we decide to shutter the 501 again for several more years (this time to finally build the DRL)...I'd probably say it's a good opportunity to consider a King alignment.

Thank goodness that decades ago, our leaders had the guts to build all the subways and streetcar tunnels that we continue to benefit from today. When are we gonna start making the same investments for future generations?

Agreed, but surely there's some sarcasm or tongue-in-cheek with that statement. Because it's also very unfortunate that we've underbuilt transit in many instances, or not built it at all. All the while arguably overbuilding in certain areas.

The original waterfront (Harbourfront) LRT + Loop was insufficient, and a prime example of shortsighted piecemeal underbuilding for what was once envisioned as a true cross-waterfront light rail network. And IMO we're going to continue this underbuilding if we choose the original EBFLRT + Loop2.0 plan approved over half a decade ago. Low speed, low capacity, myopic projections to 2021, little to no cross-waterfront service, very minimal grade-separation... I believe it's insufficient, particularly in the context: i.e. - connecting an area as large, high-value, and with such potential as the eastern waterfront. There were also many unknowns at the time that are now known.

Might come as a shock to some, but not all the ideas proposed in the Miller/Giambrone/McGuinty era were mint.

Esplanade has the Backstage/L Tower pedestrian tunnel at the p3 level, so that one would be hard to manage. Below I threw all the current drawings together. Looks like 45 Bay contemplates a platform much further south than the original loop expansions.

Also, you could likely get an agreement to build a station in the basement level of 141 Bay, right behind the Dominion Building. I'm not sure the sewer situation on Yonge, but you might be able to bring a tunnel back down under the Gardiner and get to ground level by Harbour.

Great work overlaying these images. Definitely makes it easier to understand what's going on in the area, or at least much better than any of the presentation images provided by the City. If you were to add to this, might I suggest also overlaying the future road network as proposed in the Lower Yonge Precinct's TMP.

 

[georgevicbell]

Esplanade has the Backstage/L Tower pedestrian tunnel at the p3 level, so that one would be hard to manage. Below I threw all the current drawings together. Looks like 45 Bay contemplates a platform much further south than the original loop expansions.

Also, you could likely get an agreement to build a station in the basement level of 141 Bay, right behind the Dominion Building. I'm not sure the sewer situation on Yonge, but you might be able to bring a tunnel back down under the Gardiner and get to ground level by Harbour.
View attachment 77330

Would it be possible to just have QQW go up York and loop under bremner. Then turn the existing portal around and have the bay loop serve QQE.

If they are already building a Bremer loop mayswell focus all the construction on that side of things.

This would also shorten the outage time (basically build the tunnel and loop first, then quickly build the York portal).

 

[Jeff Morgan]

With all of the transit announcements over the past few days I hope the Waterfront is not forgotten.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

What's a waterfront???

 

[raptor]

Here's an update:
http://www.waterfrontoronto.ca/uplo...waterfront_transit_reset___june_29_2016_1.pdf

 

[44 North]

With all of the transit announcements over the past few days I hope the Waterfront is not forgotten.

I concur. Even with 504 improvements, new GO stations, and the DRL (both the complete Dundas West to Pape Miller-era proposal, or the current abridged Osgoode terminus proposal) - a waterfront light rail network is vital. My hope is that a solution will come out that will be better than previous proposals in terms of speed, reliability, capacity, length; while also considering cost-saving measures and potential developments like Expo or some kind of conversion of the Hearn into a complex of regional importance.

The lynchpin in the whole plan IMO is Union. To add onto @jcam 's post further up I created an image awhile back that shows the Union connection overlaid with the Lower Yonge Precinct plan, new roads/connections, 45 Bay, and original loop proposal. It doesn't do the area full justice though because we now have a better idea of what's proposed on the LBCO lands, the extent of development spreading east of Jarvis, and that an oblique angle would naturally do a better job at showing the enormity of heights/density envisioned. Still, if anyone wants to use it as a template to create a fantasy proposal of how the line could connect to Union, they're more than welcome to. When looking at the last report it's clear that as of right now the City/TTC is actively exploring alternative ideas in place of the original loop expansion.

 

[Forgotten]

I understand that it's not easy to put up with several years of disruption, but I hate the idea that long term transportation infrastructure should be designed based on construction impact rather than what's best for moving people in a growing city. Should be also cancel plans to build the relief line on Queen Street because the streetcars will be affected? Was the inferior Scarborough subway a great idea just because it avoids an SRT shutdown? And what about all the Eglinton bus riders who are currently inconvenienced by the Crosstown?

Hold your horses. The technical evaluation gave Queen higher marks than King because it would cause less disruption. (Source: Page 18 of 21 in February evaluation) There's less to disturb because fewer people use Queen street and most of the businesses on Queen east are dead or in the process of getting there. Seriously look at how many boarded up and going out of business signs you see down there.

I concur. Even with 504 improvements, new GO stations, and the DRL (both the complete Dundas West to Pape Miller-era proposal, or the current abridged Osgoode terminus proposal) - a waterfront light rail network is vital. My hope is that a solution will come out that will be better than previous proposals in terms of speed, reliability, capacity, length; while also considering cost-saving measures and potential developments like Expo or some kind of conversion of the Hearn into a complex of regional importance.

The lynchpin in the whole plan IMO is Union. To add onto @jcam 's post further up I created an image awhile back that shows the Union connection overlaid with the Lower Yonge Precinct plan, new roads/connections, 45 Bay, and original loop proposal. It doesn't do the area full justice though because we now have a better idea of what's proposed on the LBCO lands, the extent of development spreading east of Jarvis, and that an oblique angle would naturally do a better job at showing the enormity of heights/density envisioned. Still, if anyone wants to use it as a template to create a fantasy proposal of how the line could connect to Union, they're more than welcome to. When looking at the last report it's clear that as of right now the City/TTC is actively exploring alternative ideas in place of the original loop expansion.

View attachment 79561

A potential almost like Richmond Hill node and there's no subway planned? Seriously.

 

[W. K. Lis]

With developments coming to Queen & Sherbourne and around the Unilever station, I would expect others to be buying up old stores and buildings to redevelopment them at some future date. I'm assuming they're doing the waiting game. Do they develop this year, next year, in 5 years, in 10 years, or in 25 years?

Near my home, they have vacate land available for redevelopment, but are waiting for other actions by others.

Likely, wanting to know how small or large do they do the redevelopments.

 

[Kitsune]

... how exactly is lake shore going to work once they realign harbour? Are they going to reduce lanes to fit the Eastbound traffic under the gardiner, or is the plan just to drop all that traffic off at a dead end?

 

[TransitBart]

Can't they just short-turn at Spadina/Queen's Quay loop? Also the 6 Bay bus can be increased to Queen's Quay?

Seems reasonable. Additionally. In the current shutdown on St Clair, the reason given for running the replacement buses in the traffic lanes is the centre line overhead poles may impinge on buses which are wider than streetcars. Well, well well. East of Spadina, the overhead is supported from the side. Run the buses on the ROW and then loop them at Bay. This plan is worth what you paid for it.

 

[crs1026]

At the end of the Council meeting yesterday, there was a catch-all motion to bless all the proposed priorities that didn't get the detailed debate that the Scarboro subway got.

I'm wondering if the Waterfront study stayed on the table? Didn't hear much about it.

- Paul

 

[salsa]

At the end of the Council meeting yesterday, there was a catch-all motion to bless all the proposed priorities that didn't get the detailed debate that the Scarboro subway got.

I'm wondering if the Waterfront study stayed on the table? Didn't hear much about it.

- Paul

Council is asked to approve funding for the next phase of the reset studies. I don't think they voted on it yet. Here is the motion.

http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2016.EX16.17

 

[ADRM]

I believe it's correct to say that it was not voted on yesterday. And, oh dear, I hadn't realized that these motions will result in a report-back on Phase 2 by 2017. We'll have had an Expo, an Olympics, and another couple Pan Am Games, and a Leafs Stanley Cup or four by the time shovels are in the ground here. Sigh.

2. City Council direct the Deputy City Manager, Cluster B, and the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning to report back on the results of Phase 2 of the Waterfront Transit "Reset" in the second quarter of 2017.