Union Station: Northwest PATH Expansion

[DonValleyRainbow]

It's still nonsense that it's considered being exclusive. Alignment 2 is needed regardless. Even if there's crazy utility conflicts, it should be protected for, especially when 160-174 Front St W are developed.

• 2 connects the existing PATH network west of Simcoe Street, which is currently only connected through St Andrew Station
  • 160 Front
  • Simcoe Place
  • CBC
  • RBC Place
  • The Ritz
  • Metro Hall
  • Roy Thomson Hall
• 4 connects the PATH within the block bounded by Wellington, University, King and York, but being in a parking garage may limit any associated commercial stores
  • 145 King
  • 55 University
  • HSBC
• 3 is a useful elimination of a dead end, providing another alternative path from TD Plaza while providing more direct access to 95 Wellington
• 1 just creates an alternative route from TD Plaza, not a fan in terms of building connections

Given this, I agree 2 should be built as the primary connection, and 3 should be pursued shortly after. But a link under York between TD Plaza and HSBC needs to also be on the agenda (A).

View attachment 131281

 

[muller877]

I don't think this route is a bad idea per se (especially with an eye on future developments) - but I think the route maybe relatively inconvenient for existing users that you want to divert from the current PATH.

AoD

I agree. But the York link to the TD Food court was also lacking. You would have to go back east before going North. The best solution would be to basically make a pedestrian link all the way up York to University (the Sun Life/Exchange Tower connection).

No perfect solution. At least they found one and we hopefully there will be more.

It'll be really bad if they have to close the PATH to build the new CC building for 3+ years during construction. The one route will be way overcrowded.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

I agree. But the York link to the TD Food court was also lacking. You would have to go back east before going North. The best solution would be to basically make a pedestrian link all the way up York to University (the Sun Life/Exchange Tower connection).

No perfect solution. At least they found one and we hopefully there will be more.

It'll be really bad if they have to close the PATH to build the new CC building for 3+ years during construction. The one route will be way overcrowded.

They didn't want York because it is expensive and the city balk at paying for it, not because it is a bad alignment - in fact that's the reason why we are redoing this spiel in the first place, so that's that.

AoD

 

[DSC]

Streetscape improvements in the PATH area probably fit best here. Coming to TRYCC in February 2018 https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2018/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-112797.pdf

 

[muller877]

It's still nonsense that it's considered being exclusive. Alignment 2 is needed regardless. Even if there's crazy utility conflicts, it should be protected for, especially when 160-174 Front St W are developed.

• 2 connects the existing PATH network west of Simcoe Street, which is currently only connected through St Andrew Station
  • 160 Front
  • Simcoe Place
  • CBC
  • RBC Place
  • The Ritz
  • Metro Hall
  • Roy Thomson Hall

View attachment 131281

I think it is a practical decision to wait for #2. Via the Moat I assume the PATH will connect via Citi to 151 Front. Likewise the Skywalk will connect to 151 Front.

When 156 Front is built it will connect to 151 Front and Simcoe Place.

When Oxford rebuilds the MTCC 151 Front will connect to it as well

So does the City need to spend the money to connect 1 University to Simcoe Place when Private industry will do so (just as how the PATH has grown organically in the past).

When the Jack Astor's is redeveloped at University and Front the parking garage has a staircase exit there so it is easy connect as well (and create another route to get to Simcoe Place.

 

[TOareaFan]

I agree. But the York link to the TD Food court was also lacking. You would have to go back east before going North. The best solution would be to basically make a pedestrian link all the way up York to University (the Sun Life/Exchange Tower connection).

You would have to go quite a bit further east:

That is why I thought the best route under York was to connect with the HSBC (70 York) building on the west side of the street which, in turn, is connected to 55 University anyway. Not sure why that route never even made it to the map.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

From the July Government Management Committee Meeting:

Item: http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2018.GM29.24
Report: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2018/gm/bgrd/backgroundfile-117801.pdf

University Avenue alignment chosen - project cost approx $87M. From the report (p 22/23):

I wonder how successful those proposed retail along the route will be.

AoD

 

[muller877]

From the July Government Management Committee Meeting:

Item: http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2018.GM29.24
Report: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2018/gm/bgrd/backgroundfile-117801.pdf

University Avenue alignment chosen - project cost approx $87M. From the report (p 22/23):

I wonder how successful those proposed retail along the route will be.

AoD

Great final solution. However, I do have some lingering questions from this report:

1. What will happen to the York Street ramp to the garage? Will it be closed? Alternative NB solution?
2. They discussed accessing the offices on the west side of University. How are they going to access them? A pedestrian crosswalk similar to RBC Dexia?

 

[DSC]

The EA Addendum Report was published on 16 October and "If no requests are received by November 30, the City may proceed with the project as outlined in the Project File."

See: https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/95bc-NWPATH_ESR.pdf

The City then says:

Next Steps
With Council approval, following a 30 day public review, the Class EA Addendum will be submitted to the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MOECP) before moving to final design and construction procurement. Construction is forecasted to start in 2021. (See City website at: https://www.toronto.ca/services-pay...city-facilities/union-station/northwest-path/ )

 

[DSC]

Update from Real Estate Budget documents. January 2019.

North West PATH Phase 2  On July 3, 2018, Government Management Committee adopted the staff report entitled "Northwest PATH Extension (Union Station to Wellington Street) - Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Addendum (Schedule "C")" that recommends a new route for the underground pedestrian connection from the existing underground PATH system to the northeast corner of University Avenue and Wellington Street.  The total cost of this extension is estimated at $87.852 million, of which $49.635 million was approved in FREEE's 2018 – 2027 Council Approved Capital Budget and Plan. The remaining $38.217 million is currently unfunded and not reflected in Staff Recommended 2019 – 2028 Capital Plan. Staff are currently engaged with Metrolinx to negotiate a funding agreement and plan, similar to what was agreed to for phase 1 of the North West PATH. https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2018/gm/bgrd/backgroundfile-117801.pdf  Negotiations on potential cost-sharing arrangements are currently ongoing with Metrolinx. Outcome of the negotiations with be detailed in a follow-up report to City Council in 2019. To date, the environmental assessment and study have been completed and approved by Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks.

 

[Northern Light]

The above makes me wonder.......that cost seems extraordinary for one short block...........

I posted this in the other post thread and didn't get a reply, so I'll try here.............

I've been meaning to ask those of you with more construction expertise than I.............

When building path segments, is there a (good) reason that we don't see precast, modular tunnel sections, that can be brought in on the back of a truck, used.

Specifically, I'm thinking of tunnel segments for stations that I've seen GO use, where in the space of a weekend, they have the track up, dig down, drop a tunnel it, re-bury it, and have the trains going over the top on a Monday morning.

Obviously there is then other work involved, in GO's case, under the platforms, in the PATH situation, under the sidewalks and final connections between the buildings, plus fit-out (electrical and finishes) .

But wouldn't be more efficient to just drop a precast structure in place?

 

[Jonny5]

I'm curious for updates on this project. Is it dead? Or, perhaps, functionally dead until some indeterminate future date where a magic pot of money is found? I take it the negotiations with Metrolinx for funding went nowhere?

 

[Jonny5]

I'm curious for updates on this project. Is it dead? Or, perhaps, functionally dead until some indeterminate future date where a magic pot of money is found? I take it the negotiations with Metrolinx for funding went nowhere?

Two years later, I am wondering if this has now been shelved indefinitely?
It's too bad since this made it all the way to an approved EA and ~60% approved capital budget funding with only ~$40M left unfunded, and now it's simply dead, though apparently it was even before the pandemic; and wow that last comment from me was one month before all hell broke loose.
Perhaps now more than before some of the institutional investors which own the towers in the area would be willing to spend money to build this as it would certainly attract tenants. It's not actually that much capital needed beyond what is already approved.

 

[Transportfan]

I opened this for a stupid thread bump?

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

I opened this for a stupid thread bump?

The original post was a fair question on the status of this project given nothing has been heard for awhile - whereas your post just made me think we actually had substantial movement, except that it was just a complaint about nothing.

AoD