TTC: Other Items (catch all)

[drum118]

Not sure what was going on 511 on Sunday as some cars had poles up while others had pans. Saw a northbound stop at Niagara where the driver got off and lower the pole and then raise the pan before continue north. The southbound had pan up and it was follow by a pole car. The car behind the northbound had pole up and it was follow by a pan car. Either there was a problem for the bridge or drivers forgot 511 is a pan route and fail to change over coming out of Roncesvalles Yard.

TTC still changing signs for COVID-19 that they are not the same for other vehicles in the same fleet.

With Mississauga (miWay) Transit now at Kipling, TTC has the option of moving its routes at Islington Terminal to the south outside platform to deal with the structural soundest issue there. TTC has already close 2 bus bays down and has wanted to close all of them as well tearing the structure down close to 10 years ago. As to when TTC may make changes to the terminal is unknown, but TTC needs to build accessibly access to the subway station by 2025 and this will require a new 4 bay terminal for the buses.

Since the City is planning on putting affordable housing on the whole site now, the new terminal could be included in the plan or stay with the stand alone structure next to CP Corridor.

Its possible that TTC could tear the structure down this year since a few rental units under it are now empty with the rest close at this time. If it is to be torn down, protection for a walkway to the south end needs to be in place first and work to be done after the station close. Good time to video and photograph it as it will be thing in the past in the coming years. I did this before miWay move and will do some more with miWay gone now.

Seeing a lot more riders riding the system with no mask on.

Since miWay 7/24 routes no longer service Islington, it will be interesting how riders for both systems connect to each other when TTC 300 stops at Aukland and a nice hike to the Hub from there.

From the south end of the walkway to GO platform at the Hub, you get a nice view of Canpa Sub and the old Obico land where a new TTC subway yard could be built there. You can watch the work from there for the new 3rd trail track that will take place this year.

 

[Richard White]

With Mississauga (miWay) Transit now at Kipling, TTC has the option of moving its routes at Islington Terminal to the south outside platform to deal with the structural soundest issue there. TTC has already close 2 bus bays down and has wanted to close all of them as well tearing the structure down close to 10 years ago.

They can't tear down the bus bay and use the southern platform. The only way to access that platform is via the bus bays and it literally backs into the bus bays above ground.

In order to rip down the bus bays they would need to either divert to Kipling/Royal York or build a temporary terminal in the parking lot like they did at VP.

Islington like VP has the bus bay concourse below the bays meaning any attempt to tear down or implode the bays can't be done while allowing access to the south platform.

I remember using VP when they tore down parts of the bays. The amount of dust and noise made it intolerable to the point where the TTC should close the entire station while demolition takes place.

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

I remember using VP when they tore down parts of the bays. The amount of dust and noise made it intolerable to the point where the TTC should close the entire station while demolition takes place.

It wasn't that bad when they tore it down also they had buses load and unload on street as the parking lot isn't big enough for them to go into. I really don't see them closing any stations where they need to rebuild the bus bays in to accommodate elevators.

 

[Richard White]

It wasn't that bad when they tore it down also they had buses load and unload on street as the parking lot isn't big enough for them to go into. I really don't see them closing any stations where they need to rebuild the bus bays in to accommodate elevators.

I was referring to the demolition of the VP Bus Bays where they only had tarp separating the work zones from the ground floor mezzanine. The bangs and booms from the heavy machinery plus the dust created when another part of the bay came crashing down wasnt fun.

Yes they were boarding outside but still it wasn't fun.

Islington is another matter however and really the entire station is a mess. The Mezzanine at Islington is always under construction just like the bus bays.

 

[EastYorkTTCFan]

I was referring to the demolition of the VP Bus Bays where they only had tarp separating the work zones from the ground floor mezzanine. The bangs and booms from the heavy machinery plus the dust created when another part of the bay came crashing down wasnt fun.

Yes they were boarding outside but still it wasn't fun.

Islington is another matter however and really the entire station is a mess. The Mezzanine at Islington is always under construction just like the bus bays.

Yes I know I used VP then too. I honestly don't see how they could have done it any other way unless they diverted buses to both Main Street and Warden station well they did the work.

I've only been to Islington a few times so I'm not as familiar with it as I am with either Victoria park station or Warden station.

 

[drum118]

They can't tear down the bus bay and use the southern platform. The only way to access that platform is via the bus bays and it literally backs into the bus bays above ground.

In order to rip down the bus bays they would need to either divert to Kipling/Royal York or build a temporary terminal in the parking lot like they did at VP.

Islington like VP has the bus bay concourse below the bays meaning any attempt to tear down or implode the bays can't be done while allowing access to the south platform.

I remember using VP when they tore down parts of the bays. The amount of dust and noise made it intolerable to the point where the TTC should close the entire station while demolition takes place.

TTC Riders would still use the concourse level with protection over them while the structure is torn down. TTC wants the buses off the roof slab at this time

The concourse under the current bus bay would remain until a new terminal is built, depending on the location of it.

Unlike VP, removing the top terminal would not take that long.

Another option would have the buses move to the north parking lot since there will be only 4 buses using the station while the structure is torn down. This would take 1-2 weeks and then move back to the south platform that would remain for the time being.

At some point, the whole concourse under the terminal will be remove along with the roof to make way for a new terminal or after a new one is built else where.

How and where the new terminal will be built will be based on the design of the new structure for the affordable housing. It could be on the surface or underground with the new entrance/exit at Aberfoyle with new traffic lights.

Right now is a guessing game until TTC make announcement as what will happen for the station and parking lot along with a site plan and going by what was plan for the current terminal.

 

[Richard White]

TTC Riders would still use the concourse level with protection over them while the structure is torn down.

Is that even legal? I would assume the MOL would have concerns with any sort of pedestrian traffic walking through a construction zone involving demolition (even with protection).

The concourse under the current bus bay would remain until a new terminal is built, depending on the location of it.

Not sure how that is possible. Like VP the bus bays are directly on top of the concourse. You can't just tear it down and leave it as is while having people use it. When you start tearing down walls, staircases, etc you start bringing about other structural and safety issues that bring into question the stability of the bays.

The only way this would work is if they DELICATELY removed the bays without dropping concrete slabs down on the bus roadway. The moment you start dropping concrete slabs on the bus roadway it weakens it.

As I said before I was watching them bring down Bay 1 from Albion Avenue at VP.. When the concrete slab from the roof came down it made one hell of a boom that you would hear 100 yards away.

Another option would have the buses move to the north parking lot since there will be only 4 buses using the station while the structure is torn down. This would take 1-2 weeks and then move back to the south platform that would remain for the time being.

The best bet would be to move it to the parking lot and have people routed up the stairs in the main concourse level. This would by-pass the construction.

 

[drum118]

Is that even legal? I would assume the MOL would have concerns with any sort of pedestrian traffic walking through a construction zone involving demolition (even with protection).




Not sure how that is possible. Like VP the bus bays are directly on top of the concourse. You can't just tear it down and leave it as is while having people use it. When you start tearing down walls, staircases, etc you start bringing about other structural and safety issues that bring into question the stability of the bays.

The only way this would work is if they DELICATELY removed the bays without dropping concrete slabs down on the bus roadway. The moment you start dropping concrete slabs on the bus roadway it weakens it.

As I said before I was watching them bring down Bay 1 from Albion Avenue at VP.. When the concrete slab from the roof came down it made one hell of a boom that you would hear 100 yards away.



The best bet would be to move it to the parking lot and have people routed up the stairs in the main concourse level. This would by-pass the construction.

Yes it legal to walk under demolition or construction so long as the protection is in place and meet code for it. You have already done this.

You forget the bus terminal starts where the west wall and stairs start in the East tunnel, not the main tunnel between the retail. Some shoring may have to be place to support the roof in the main tunnel that about dead centre. west of the main terminal is on dirt.

TTC most likely require section of the roof be remove in section to dismantle to the west on solid ground.

I expect TTC telling retail that are most likely on yearly lease at this time that their time is up this year or move to 90 day notices to vacate. Some may pack it in this year since foot traffic will be less than 25% with miWay no longer there.

I have a lot of videos and photos of VP before, during the removal of the old terminal as well the building of the new one with a lot of noise and dust.

We may hear something at TTC Jan meeting with the report of miWay moving to Kipling on Jan 4 as what is plan for the terminal, the station and the development of the whole area.

I should not all the advertisements and frames have been removed from the subway wall.

 

[W. K. Lis]

While the TTC has a farebox recovery ratio of 68.0%, Hong Kong (MTR) has 124%.

Montreal 46%, New York Transit Authority 47%, Los Angeles 23%, Detroit 20%

 

[Steve X]

While the TTC has a farebox recovery ratio of 68.0%, Hong Kong (MTR) has 124%.

Montreal 46%, New York Transit Authority 47%, Los Angeles 23%, Detroit 20%

There's a huge difference between the TTC and the MTR. TTC runs buses trains and subway while the MTR primary operates subways, electric rail and a smaller scale light rail system. Unlike cities like NYC or Paris where there are multiple lines running in parallel within a walkable distance, MTR only have a line where millions of riders would funnel into a nearby station. There's no duplication of service. They simply don't have anything like an U on Yonge and University or in Montreal where the Orange and Green line serves the downtown. That would eliminate extra maintenance and operating cost. They rely on longer trains and better line management. Hong Kong doesn't really have any "suburbs" either. Everywhere the subway reaches is developed into a smaller city core with a decent density. So it's not possible to clone their system and expect it to work here. HK is so gridlocked and pretty much impossible to own a car, everyone would either resort to the subway or be late. Manhattan have similar gridlock issues thus they have ridership on their subway. The issue is too many old and low capacity lines.

It's also good to note that MTR is a much newer system than the TTC but the original lines are reaching 40 years old and reliability is degrading. Being privately operated, of course they are taking better action than the TTC. I think in 20-30 years, they would see more reliability issues as tunnels reach 50-60 years old. Subways don't last 100 years Robbie!

 

[Streety McCarface]

The issue is too many old and low capacity lines.

No, the issue is that you only have to pay 2.75 to go 30 miles (50 km) in their system, and the fact that they have a huge bus network.

 

[W. K. Lis]

There's a huge difference between the TTC and the MTR. TTC runs buses trains and subway while the MTR primary operates subways, electric rail and a smaller scale light rail system. Unlike cities like NYC or Paris where there are multiple lines running in parallel within a walkable distance, MTR only have a line where millions of riders would funnel into a nearby station. There's no duplication of service. They simply don't have anything like an U on Yonge and University or in Montreal where the Orange and Green line serves the downtown. That would eliminate extra maintenance and operating cost. They rely on longer trains and better line management. Hong Kong doesn't really have any "suburbs" either. Everywhere the subway reaches is developed into a smaller city core with a decent density. So it's not possible to clone their system and expect it to work here. HK is so gridlocked and pretty much impossible to own a car, everyone would either resort to the subway or be late. Manhattan have similar gridlock issues thus they have ridership on their subway. The issue is too many old and low capacity lines.

It's also good to note that MTR is a much newer system than the TTC but the original lines are reaching 40 years old and reliability is degrading. Being privately operated, of course they are taking better action than the TTC. I think in 20-30 years, they would see more reliability issues as tunnels reach 50-60 years old. Subways don't last 100 years Robbie!

The MTR also owns and leases out high-rise residential and commercial space that was built around each station. A large source of revenue comes from them, something the TTC is forbidden to do.

There is no chance that the TTC would develop and own high-rise buildings when they rebuild the Islington Station.

 

[Northern Light]

The MTR also owns and leases out high-rise residential and commercial space that was built around each station. A large source of revenue comes from them, something the TTC is forbidden to do.

There is no chance that the TTC would develop and own high-rise buildings when they rebuild the Islington Station.

Correct about the MTR; also correct the TTC does not act as a developer over its stations; though worth saying they do, in fact, make millions off ground leases.

The TTC leases land to Oxford (Canada Square); but is also the underlying owner of several other key parcels in the City.

Just like the City itself is also an underlying holder of many lands and collects lease revenues, notably for UT at 11 Bay.

The TTC could certainly be earning more of those than they do; through both additional developments and redevelopments of existing sites.

I would expect to see some of that in the not too distant future; though in the scheme of the TTC's annual budget the numbers will not be enormous.

One curious spot though, the worn-out office building over Bay Station would have seemed a likely site for such intensification, but will instead become an eastward expansion of Yorkville Park.

I can't say I object at all; even if does me a few million per year in foregone revenues.

 

[Johnny Au]

There's a huge difference between the TTC and the MTR. TTC runs buses trains and subway while the MTR primary operates subways, electric rail and a smaller scale light rail system. Unlike cities like NYC or Paris where there are multiple lines running in parallel within a walkable distance, MTR only have a line where millions of riders would funnel into a nearby station. There's no duplication of service. They simply don't have anything like an U on Yonge and University or in Montreal where the Orange and Green line serves the downtown. That would eliminate extra maintenance and operating cost. They rely on longer trains and better line management. Hong Kong doesn't really have any "suburbs" either. Everywhere the subway reaches is developed into a smaller city core with a decent density. So it's not possible to clone their system and expect it to work here. HK is so gridlocked and pretty much impossible to own a car, everyone would either resort to the subway or be late. Manhattan have similar gridlock issues thus they have ridership on their subway. The issue is too many old and low capacity lines.

It's also good to note that MTR is a much newer system than the TTC but the original lines are reaching 40 years old and reliability is degrading. Being privately operated, of course they are taking better action than the TTC. I think in 20-30 years, they would see more reliability issues as tunnels reach 50-60 years old. Subways don't last 100 years Robbie!

Hong Kong (except the Kowloon Peninsula and the New Territories) and New York City (except the Bronx and Marble Hill) are on islands, thereby constraining space and increasing density. Practically the entirety of Hong Kong has terrain so difficult, San Francisco is practically level in comparison.

 

[Steve X]

The MTR also owns and leases out high-rise residential and commercial space that was built around each station. A large source of revenue comes from them, something the TTC is forbidden to do.

There is no chance that the TTC would develop and own high-rise buildings when they rebuild the Islington Station.

I rather the TTC stay out of that business. Yes TTC does lease space to other entities like Wellesley Station or McCaul Loop. TTC owns the land. For the TTC to manage another department is not realistic. They could have a MARS building going empty for years. MTR develops an entire village of 8 buildings for a station. TO unfortunately doesn't have that much space to develop at a time. When a developer puts up a condo here, HK is putting up 8 at the same time. TO doesn't have the capacity to develop like that. MTR is a business, they operate systems all over the world and even bid to operate GO Trains (source: https://www.railwaypro.com/wp/four-shortlisted-for-greater-toronto-rail-expansion-programme/). TTC is just an essential service provider struggling to make ends meat. MTR still begs for government funds when it comes to capital projects. So they aren't out of this world.

Hong Kong (except the Kowloon Peninsula and the New Territories) and New York City (except the Bronx and Marble Hill) are on islands, thereby constraining space and increasing density. Practically the entirety of Hong Kong has terrain so difficult, San Francisco is practically level in comparison.

It's a good thing TO isn't constraint to a few islands. All the links would be jammed packed in rush hour. The only way is to build more links costing billions for a kilometer.