Waterfront: Lower Yonge Precinct Plan

[drum118]

Plan looks good but it will be a massive failure if the East Bayfront LRT is not built.

It will be, but not as TTC vision.

The removal of Union loop has to take place since none of TTC plans will handle the ridership. Even the new plan for the loop is only good for today, but not for the haft or full built out, especially now with density being 4 times or more when the Waterfront Transit Plan was approved in 2006.

The plan I call for in 2008 is now on the table as an option that will see transit staying on the surface including Bay with Bay being close to traffic south of either Front or Queen St. It would require TTC getting duel end cars to deal with stub tacks at Union. All the new ends for new lines will only have to be stub and will save land for better use than a loop.

Loblaw's will remain in the area as part of a new development and you most likely see a few other showing up as well.

Anything not under Waterfront Toronto control will see higher density than what they want and seeing that already with the plans approved and construction underway.

 

[Jeff Morgan]

It will be, but not as TTC vision.
The removal of Union loop has to take place since none of TTC plans will handle the ridership. Even the new plan for the loop is only good for today, but not for the haft or full built out, especially now with density being 4 times or more when the Waterfront Transit Plan was approved in 2006.

The plan I call for in 2008 is now on the table as an option that will see transit staying on the surface including Bay with Bay being close to traffic south of either Front or Queen St. It would require TTC getting duel end cars to deal with stub tacks at Union. All the new ends for new lines will only have to be stub and will save land for better use than a loop.

I really like the idea of making Bay a transit corridor south of Front. It makes more sense than any of the other options that I have seen for the Union connection.

 

[lead82]

I like this idea but who will pay for it? The second question I have is will Toronto City Council be willing to make any Street a transit corridor. Bay from Front to QQ would make sense but a lot of drivers will not like it as it will cut off one of the main entries into the Financial District from Lakeshore/Gardiner.

 

[drum118]

I like this idea but who will pay for it? The second question I have is will Toronto City Council be willing to make any Street a transit corridor. Bay from Front to QQ would make sense but a lot of drivers will not like it as it will cut off one of the main entries into the Financial District from Lakeshore/Gardiner.

Current cost to built the new Union Loop is $400 million. If you add the cost saving of rebuilding the portal as a T as well the underground tunnel to Freemen, there most of your money for the transit mall.

Again, cities where built for people and time to go back to that root since cars only make up a small fraction of use on Bay St, as well cause all kinds of delays for other drivers.

If a traffic study was done like it was done for the QQ redesign, it will find car use is while be lower than it was on QQ before it was reduce and supported the reduction in the first place.

The bus only lane doesn't exist at peak time as it is fill with illegal vehicles in the first place, delay TTC service.

If the Chief City planners call for this closure, it is saying something, but council votes the car way since they are the ones that keep them in office.

I and anyone will tell you who walk north on Bay St at PM peak, sidewalk too narrow and force to walk on the road as a seawall of pedestrians head south to Union Station has no room for us.

During the summer months it heavily used to get to the ferry docks than try to catch a bus or use a streetcar.

 

[Jeff Morgan]

Current cost to built the new Union Loop is $400 million. If you add the cost saving of rebuilding the portal as a T as well the underground tunnel to Freemen, there most of your money for the transit mall.m.

Do you know if this option is being seriously considered as part of the WF reset?

 

[drum118]

Do you know if this option is being seriously considered as part of the WF reset?

Yes to a point

 

[nfitz]

Yes to a point

Presumably the fools who are delaying the whole thing, with the bizarre proposed moving sidewalk to replace the Bay tunnel, need to get that idiocy out of their system first.

 

[lead82]

A transit mall would make too much sense for this city council. Tory will want to spend 10X more money to bury it and rebuild the loop and then cry poor to province and Feds - meaning nothing will get done for a while.

 

[drum118]

Presumably the fools who are delaying the whole thing, with the bizarre proposed moving sidewalk to replace the Bay tunnel, need to get that idiocy out of their system first.

The moving sidewalk and people mover goes back as far as 2008 when we did the EA for QQ and shot down then.

Council is kind of pushing this this idea as well.

Bottom line, far too costly to bring the tunnels up to safety code and to have people just walk it, let alone having moving sidewalk.

One of the option is to have a loop on the west side of ACC for Bremner and again dumb as well useless.

I will say at this time, you will have to walk from Union to QQ to catch an east-west 509 on the surface. A continue e-w line has always been vision since 2004. Thats about 10 minute walk.

 

[nfitz]

I will say at this time, you will have to walk from Union to QQ to catch an east-west 509 on the surface. A continue e-w line has always been vision since 2004. Thats about 10 minute walk.

The only way that happens, if if the subway miraculously gets to this point.

The ridership studies would be interesting ... look where 509 and 510 riders are going. They aren't getting off at Queens Quay (heading East) and jumping on the 72 bus. They are going to Union.

 

[drum118]

The only way that happens, if if the subway miraculously gets to this point.

The ridership studies would be interesting ... look where 509 and 510 riders are going. They aren't getting off at Queens Quay (heading East) and jumping on the 72 bus. They are going to Union.

I can tell you, its on the table at this time with a strong push for it by those running the show.

 

[muller877]

Presumably the fools who are delaying the whole thing, with the bizarre proposed moving sidewalk to replace the Bay tunnel, need to get that idiocy out of their system first.

Actually ThyssenKrupp has really improved the 10 year old technology from Pearson. Still goes 7 km/hr (10 km/hr if you walk on it) but have fixed the bugs in the system. Basically Pearson's was a beta version and the new versions are fully functional (mostly new tech and hence the renaming from TurboTrack to Accel). 10 years of R&D does a lot.

They could put 3 moving walkways and 1 normal walkway into the tunnel (1 of the moving walkway can be shut down for repairs). The trip from Union to Queens Quay would take exactly 3 minutes. And for capacity it can handle 7200 people per hour (lots of capacity)

How long does the current streetcar take? Based on when I take it the length is about 2 minutes. So an extra 1 minute.

With the new bus terminal it would be fairly easy to make 2 sections of moving walkways (vs 1). To allow for a connection to the bus terminal vs building a new stop and having the risk of pedestrians crossing the streetcar track. This would also allow for reduced demand at the concourse level of Union before/after the Leafs as it can access the ACC as well.

$400M is a lot of money. Adding a minute or two onto a connection compared to $400M should be analyzed, not outright ignored. Calling a group fo people names is not any way to debate any issue.

 

[nfitz]

Actually ThyssenKrupp has really improved the 10 year old technology from Pearson. Still goes 7 km/hr (10 km/hr if you walk on it) but have fixed the bugs in the system. Basically Pearson's was a beta version and the new versions are fully functional (mostly new tech and hence the renaming from TurboTrack to Accel). 10 years of R&D does a lot.

I was cursing at Pearson the other day with some of those walkways not running.

But there's a huge difference between Pearson walkways and TTC. Salt, salt, salt.

Let them test it in the Spadina connecting tunnel for a few years first.

They could put 3 moving walkways and 1 normal walkway into the tunnel (1 of the moving walkway can be shut down for repairs). The trip from Union to Queens Quay would take exactly 3 minutes. And for capacity it can handle 7200 people per hour (lots of capacity)

How long does the current streetcar take? Based on when I take it the length is about 2 minutes. So an extra 1 minute.

$400M is a lot of money. Adding a minute or two onto a connection compared to $400M should be analyzed, not outright ignored.

It's nothing compared to the $3 billion we are spending for a single subway station in Scarborough. There's still be a significant spend necessary to make that tunnel human rated, build a new underground station at Queens Quay/Yonge, modify Union Station for the walkways (there's a lot of concrete in the way at the north, where the tunnel stops being double track). So the savings are somewhat less than $400 million.

Calling a group fo people names is not any way to debate any issue.

Not sure telling them to fo helps either - or are you suggesting they eat fo.

No, I wouldn't call them it if I was debating it with them. But I can be pretty clear of what I think of them, for now delaying this project even longer, with absurd ideas that clearly aren't going to happen. Especially while the province/feds are in the midst of dropping funding now. Not having this up for funding right now, puts it even further down the list.

 

[rbt]

It's nothing compared to the $3 billion we are spending for a single subway station in Scarborough. There's still be a significant spend necessary to make that tunnel human rated, build a new underground station at Queens Quay/Yonge, modify Union Station for the walkways (there's a lot of concrete in the way at the north, where the tunnel stops being double track). So the savings are somewhat less than $400 million.

I'm pretty sure that $400M quote is 4 to 6 years old now; so it's likely closer to $500M if started today (with potential for a cost escalation of 50% due to unknowns becoming known). Probably still worth it.

If we're ignoring spending constraints, I'd like to see a $4B project that dives the 509/510 below the subway and runs up to Queen via tunnel, then a ROW to Bloor (reduce Bay to 1 traffic lane each direction). I give it $4B due to PATH and DRL complications/connections.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I can tell you, its on the table at this time with a strong push for it by those running the show.

Why is there such a strong desire for a continuous east-west line? As nftiz points out, the travel patterns in the area are predominantly to/from Union Station. And even if we must have a continuous east-west service, that could be acomplished by having a branch of the 509/510 continue east past Yonge, without stopping at Union. Is this desire for a continuous east-west service purely about cost savings?