News   Apr 24, 2024
 330     0 
News   Apr 24, 2024
 529     0 
News   Apr 24, 2024
 482     0 

Waterfront: Lower Yonge Precinct Plan

It may be true that the main travel pattern is to/from Union, but my guess is that the majority of those are only going one stop to from Queens Quay. May not make sense to spend so much money for a one stop desire line. This is why the moving sidewalk is on the table
 
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?
There is no doubt that the (current, at least) travel patterns show people wanting to connect to the subway to go north not to go further east or west. I think this talk of a continuous Queens Quay line come from those who look at maps rather than look at where people actually want/need to go. Apart from the problems of maintenance, salt and length, having a continuous east-west QQ line and expecting people to get off the streetcar or subway to get onto a 'people mover to/from Union is really not going to work.
 
It may be true that the main travel pattern is to/from Union, but my guess is that the majority of those are only going one stop to from Queens Quay. May not make sense to spend so much money for a one stop desire line. This is why the moving sidewalk is on the table

Are you saying that the majority of people are going to Queens Quay (underground) station? If so, that's definitely not true. All the stops along Queens Quay generate considerable demand, in my experience using the 510/509. Queens Quay Station likely isn't even the busiest stop on the line.
 
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?
The travel patterns are changing though. Look at the extension of the Bay and Sherbourne bus services. A continuous east west line also eliminates that goddamned portal people keep crashing into. A full rebuild as a full delta along with a loop rebuild would be great but the money simply doesn't look like it is coming.
 
The travel patterns are changing though. Look at the extension of the Bay and Sherbourne bus services. A continuous east west line also eliminates that goddamned portal people keep crashing into. A full rebuild as a full delta along with a loop rebuild would be great but the money simply doesn't look like it is coming.

So, we are removing a fully grade separated link to a subway station because some cars get confused sometimes? Also, the Bay and Sherbourne buses actually travel through the core, and link up to subways. An LRT with no subway connection would have insanely low ridership I imagine. What's the opportunity cost here? Or maybe, it might just be the right solution for our money troubles. Let's start with testing a pedestrian walkway from Kennedy to the Scarborough Town Centre, and see if it works!
 
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.
Quite possible - also I don't know for which configuration. Some versions include even more platform space for the Bremner streetcar line ... I don't know what happens to that if they turn Bay Street into a walkway (probably a underground loop west of York and Bremner, or turning up and/or down Spadina to King or Bremner, looking at the various June 2016 options.

I don't hate the Bay/Freeland proposal ... is that still floating around? It solves the through traffic on Queens Quay versus Bay Tunnel dilemma, with a simple everything runs though but no loop solution.

upload_2017-4-17_20-4-22.png
 

Attachments

  • upload_2017-4-17_20-4-22.png
    upload_2017-4-17_20-4-22.png
    925.2 KB · Views: 982
It may be true that the main travel pattern is to/from Union, but my guess is that the majority of those are only going one stop to from Queens Quay. May not make sense to spend so much money for a one stop desire line. This is why the moving sidewalk is on the table
That is most certainly not what I've observed in evening rush hour. The streetcars are packed leaving Unsion and few get off at Queens Quay. In the morning the streetcars are packed arriving at Queens Quay from the west, and most stay on to Union.

So, we are removing a fully grade separated link to a subway station because some cars get confused sometimes?
I haven't heard it having anything to do with automobiles, but rather trying to save the cost of having to create more platforms at Union.
 
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?
The vision since 2004 was to have a number of different alignment of routes that would by pass Union while others would service use Union from both directions.

The current thinking of the power to be is to have a bypass without having the loop to save the cost of expanding it, since ridership is suppose to be higher outbound than inbound at AM peak. Expanding Union is a waste of money and will never meet the need at 50% increase, let a lone 100% once full built out is in place.

Don't support most of the current thinking regarding the reset view of council. This is supposed to be done on the cheap cheap side.

Metrolinx is not willing to look at a Freeland option or any option to the Union Loop.

I stand by my 2008 proposal today more so, especially taking it to Bloor St as its cheaper than anything so far and could be up and running within 2 years.
 
Last edited:
Would you mind elaborating your 2008 proposal for those of us that haven't been following it that long?
I will revised it based on the fact GO Transit will be using the Lake Shore for entrance/exit in place of Bay now to the new terminal.

Bay St become a pedestrian transit mall from Queen St to Queens Quay.

2 southbound tracks between QQ and Harbour with one northbound. The southbound tracks allow cars to go both direction without interfering with each other.

From Harbour to Lake Shore becomes 4 tracks to split the directions. From Lake Shore to Front become 5 tracks with 3 being stub ends. 2 tracks north to Queen St and then onto Bloor St on the north side where stub ends will be. There will be 5 platforms under the RR tracks.

Route 6 will run north of Bloor only and could run to/from St George or become a totally new route.

Sidewalks will be wider than they are now and flush with the roadway, meaning no curbs. No bike lanes being allow for south of Queen. You will be able to plant trees and shrubs for this area.

Which route would run to Bloor could be one or 2 different route with the east being the prefer option, but not set in stone.

With duel end cars being needed, all new loop areas would be stub only, freeing up land and location of stop. Also the cost to build them.

This option would remove the need for $400 million for the new loop, the cost of building a T junction and the tunneling to Freeland.

You could open things up in phase north of Front. Going north of Front acts a a relief line for the Yonge Line and will still be needed if and when the DRL is built.

The QQ Bay intersection would have to be setup to allow streetcars to turn without interference from pedestrians since this was TTC greatest concern back in 2008.

Because traffic ends up blocking Bay intersection most of the time, crossing gates be install to stop traffic from blocking the intersections to allow better flow for everyone and keep transit on schedule.

May have to look at crossing gates for Bay to stop clueless drivers making illegal turns.

Going to duel end cars, you can put in extra crossovers to allow cars to use one track while one being repair.

There is no place in the city core to put loops in and why stub tracks.

You build all the surface track on Bay and QQE first with the exception of the intersection and this allow 509 & 510 to continue to operate. Once everything is done, you close QQ for a few months to fill in the existing portal and built the T junction. The faster it built, the sooner the lines can go into service.
 
Last edited:
So, we are removing a fully grade separated link to a subway station because some cars get confused sometimes?
Not because. Just call it an added extra. Also, have you missed how often that tunnel has to be closed for repairs?
Also, the Bay and Sherbourne buses actually travel through the core, and link up to subways. An LRT with no subway connection would have insanely low ridership I imagine. What's the opportunity cost here? Or maybe, it might just be the right solution for our money troubles. Let's start with testing a pedestrian walkway from Kennedy to the Scarborough Town Centre, and see if it works!
The 510 connects to the subway at Spadina. What the 509 connects to (other than a GO station) would depend on where the LRT tracks would end up east of Bay - such as at the Sumach DRL station.
 
So, we are removing a fully grade separated link to a subway station because some cars get confused sometimes? Also, the Bay and Sherbourne buses actually travel through the core, and link up to subways. An LRT with no subway connection would have insanely low ridership I imagine. What's the opportunity cost here? Or maybe, it might just be the right solution for our money troubles. Let's start with testing a pedestrian walkway from Kennedy to the Scarborough Town Centre, and see if it works!

A moving sidewalk is a transit solution but without the need to wait for a bus. So there is a connection the subway.

Think of Central to Hong Kong Station. It's a 3-6 minute walk between the 2 lines. Same as it would be here.

The patterns are also changing on Queens Quay/Bay. With RBC, the new GO Bus terminal, etc you are seeing a large influx of transit demand contra-flow from Union to Ferry Docks/Harbourfront. How do we manage this 1 km stretch of first mile demand vs the demand at the outer fringes (George Brown, Ex, Fort York, etc)?

A surface LRT does not work. Crossing Queens Quay, Harbour and Lakeshore adds too much time to the trip (I could walk faster even if its a transit mall and they have some signal priority). So you either spend 1/2 billion+ on a 500 meter tunnel or something else.
 

Back
Top