Bay Avenue line

[M II A II R II K]

I don't know whether or not it's feasible when it comes to digging foundations in certain areas but it's an idea that could help free up space on the Yonge line.

Instead of transferring onto the Yonge line south of the 401, people could transfer to an Avenue line instead, especially if their destination is actually closer to Bay St. than Yonge, where those current commuters would ordinarily use the Yonge line too.

The same goes for people transferring at Bay station although I imagine the line would have to run above Bay station since there's already a station below it.

They can close it during after hours and weekends if there's not enough traffic to warrant having it open.

 

[unimaginative2]

A Bay LRT was examined during the Downtown Relief Line study back in the 1980s. It was dismissed for a number of reasons, chiefly because it was equally expensive as and far less useful than a Pape-Waterfront DRL at relieving the Yonge line.

 

[M II A II R II K]

Well I was talking about a mostly underground subway, which would be entirely underground under Bay St. and in addition to that this line would go up to at least the 401 which would capture some of the Yonge line riders that would connect to it from east west routes from that far north.

Although alot more expensive it may be enough to entice enough people off the Yonge line and the crowding at Bloor/Yonge, even the same at a lesser extent at St. George.

 

[unimaginative2]

I agree, but it just makes much more sense to build a new underground subway along a route like Pape/Don Mills, which would intercept bus riders coming from the east before they reach Yonge. Avenue Road/Bay would simply serve the very narrow catchment area between the two existing subway lines. It also wouldn't really put much new territory within a reasonable walk of a subway stop, unlike the Don Mills line which would add hundreds of thousands of people.

 

[299 bloor call control.]

Many people already avoid B-Y by getting off BD trains at Bay and taking the bus, this is why 6 Bay is still one of the most frequent routes during the rush hours. I think an easy solution is to just put in a BRT route down the middle of the street.

 

[Towered]

Bring back the Bay streetcar! Even the TTC is on record for regretting tearing up the tracks. While we're at it, they should finally connect all the sporadic pieces of track on Parliament (and Coxwell) south of Bloor so that the entire length has a streetcar line. I'd love to see more streetcar routes, even if they have to be in mixed traffic, but obviously that won't be possible until the new batch of cars arrives.

 

[M II A II R II K]

I take it an underground LRT for Bay St is too expensive, even though it would be nice and get alot of riders.

 

[ShonTron]

LRT is the solution to all of our problems!

 

[299 bloor call control.]

Bay Street Trolley in PROW!

 

[DSCToronto]

While we're at it, they should finally connect all the sporadic pieces of track on Parliament (and Coxwell) south of Bloor so that the entire length has a streetcar line. I'd love to see more streetcar routes, even if they have to be in mixed traffic, but obviously that won't be possible until the new batch of cars arrives.

The EA for the West Don Lands TTC line DID look at getting to Queens Quay by extending the streetcar line on Parliament from King St south to Queen's Quay (and possibly linking it north of Carleton to the Castle Frank Station). Of course the TTC is dead set against any lines in mixed traffic as they blame ALL the scheduling problems on traffic rather than their own mismanagement of surface routes so they were not too keen and it is true that a line on Parliament would not serve the new West Don Lands development. The line will now go down Cherry Street from King.

The tracks on Parliament from Gerrard to King are actually to be replaced in July/August so ONE DAY there could be streetcar service on Parliament again.

 

[dowlingm]

I have to say I am pro-Parliament as a Yonge-Bloor reliever but you'd probably need very aggressive traffic management and some expropriation... the former is clearly beyond TTC's cultural reach.

Edit to note: two stations at Bay (don't forget Lower) and PATH connections across Bay in several places... too hard for too little return I think.

 

[drum118]

I have to say I am pro-Parliament as a Yonge-Bloor reliever but you'd probably need very aggressive traffic management and some expropriation... the former is clearly beyond TTC's cultural reach.

Edit to note: two stations at Bay (don't forget Lower) and PATH connections across Bay in several places... too hard for too little return I think.

The Bay stations will have to be deep to get under what every is in the way.

Even when the RH GO line becomes 10-20 minute service, the ridership will too great for the Yonge line as everyone is not going to the core. The area around the line will add more riders as the areas get redeveloped to require a 2nd north-south Yonge line let alone one going down Don Mills or Victoria.

I have said in the past that any new Yonge line needs to bend over to Bay St south of Summerhill so the line service the crosstown line at Summerhill. The Yonge stations entrance/exit will never handle the crowds for both lines. This way the Bay stations will help with the redevelopment alone the route as well service the current places.

During the West Don/East Bay EA study, extending the LRT up Bay St at grade or underground was refused to be look at by TTC. The case was made for Parliament St as a relief line from Castle Frank and again TTC shot it down. Bay itself needs to be closed to traffic north of Queen as the pedestrians traffic will be too great for the existing sidewalks. A good place for both pedestrians and cycles.

Then, there was an traffic engineer for this project who was a pro car person that kept shooting down how to reduce road width or increase the move to transit regardless what the city policy call for as well instructed by council.