Re: design - one would hope there is an attempt to move away from the glass tower look and more towards a richer material palette. There are hints of that in the colour renderings (browish/golden balconies) but that's just an accent.

AoD
 
So long as no one's bedroom is facing 10m from someone's office, this building seems ok. This is a good area for intense density being close to downtown, two subway lines, and much retail and jobs.

Renders are ugly, but much nicer than the HNR Dundas Sq. Tower...
 
Jacob Laponointe said:
So long as no one's bedroom is facing 10m from someone's office, this building seems ok. This is a good area for intense density being close to downtown, two subway lines, and much retail and jobs.
Click to expand...

But there are a lot of office space in the HBC tower that would be stuck looking into this building's blank wall ?
 
Yes, but 438 University Avenue (Air Miles Tower) was able to retain its Class A rating despite the close proximity of its new neighbour. There's no reason to believe that 2 Bloor Street East (Hudson's Bay Centre) would be any different.
 
I don't know how the Yonge/Bloor interchange station is going to handle all these new bodies. Sure, in the summer a lot of them will be walking, but come winter they'll be cramming into what is already a critically overcrowded space. Help in the form of the DRL is decades away. In the meantime all of Yonge south of Bloor needs to become pedestrian and bikes only, along with separated bike lanes on Bloor and Bay.

Ideally, a Yonge Express Line--switching over to Bay south of Rosedale--would solve all of these problems. But I suspect the Greenland icecap will be gone before that ever happens.
 
Irishmonk said:
Ideally, a Yonge Express Line--switching over to Bay south of Rosedale--would solve all of these problems. But I suspect the Greenland icecap will be gone before that ever happens.
Click to expand...
I don't understand why so many people think we should build an express Yonge Line when a DRL would get enough people off the Yonge Line to put Bloor-Yonge under capacity again. I'd prefer we build new subway routes rather than building a subway route directly under an existing subway route. NYC is literally the only other place with Express subways, and the only reason they have them is because they built them 100 years ago.
 
LNahid2000 said:
I don't understand why so many people think we should build an express Yonge Line when a DRL would get enough people off the Yonge Line to put Bloor-Yonge under capacity again. I'd prefer we build new subway routes rather than building a subway route directly under an existing subway route. NYC is literally the only other place with Express subways, and the only reason they have them is because they built them 100 years ago.
Click to expand...
Toronto is also the only city dumb enough to design their network to put all of their transit load onto one subway line.

The Relief Line only makes a credible impact if it is extended to Sheppard. In the long run, we are looking at 45k riders on the Yonge subway by the mid 2040s (if we extend it to Richmond Hill) while our capacity is 36,000 with ATC. (And the added capacity of ATC is completely removed in the case of delays and long-boarding times at Bloor-Yonge, so in reality, probably closer to 30,000 at rush hour)

An express route under Bay may need to be studied at some point.
 
Sometimes it seems all that happens are new transit studies being commissioned. It's absolutely maddening.
 
Governments change. Maybe the only way to get something built is to keep the same people in power for several terms.
 
Ugh. I imagine that would be even worse. People currently in power demonstrating zero competence in transit strategizing, only to be awarded several consecutive terms? No thanks.
 
LNahid2000 said:
I don't understand why so many people think we should build an express Yonge Line when a DRL would get enough people off the Yonge Line to put Bloor-Yonge under capacity again. I'd prefer we build new subway routes rather than building a subway route directly under an existing subway route.
Click to expand...

At some point over the long term, the DRL will not be sufficient if the city keeps growing at this rate. Beyond 2050, we may seriously need to consider this proposal if it's the only remaining option.
 
I've just moved back to TO after 3.5 years in NYC, and the express trains there are actually now beloved by many—folks walk long distances above-ground past local stops to get on an express. For one thing, it allows some people who live in less expensive neighbourhoods reasonable-length commutes to their places of business in central Manhattan.

I'm not sure the RL would afford the same benefits for a few reasons, but I support it because the Yonge line is already so massively over capacity (and will only worsen as the population continues to grow).

I also live in the neighbourhood and welcome the added density, though the design definitely leaves much to be desired (as does so much new and recent build in the city). I'd love to see developers choose to be more ambitious in the designs they propose, both in built form and in public realm considerations.
 
Lenser said:
Ugh. I imagine that would be even worse. People currently in power demonstrating zero competence in transit strategizing, only to be awarded several consecutive terms? No thanks.
Click to expand...

LOL, you think the alternatives would be better?
 
salsa said:
At some point over the long term, the DRL will not be sufficient if the city keeps growing at this rate. Beyond 2050, we may seriously need to consider this proposal if it's the only remaining option.
Click to expand...
When the DRL is no longer sufficient, we can build another north/south line to intercept riders rather than building another Yonge line. Again, I'd prefer we have subways that provide access to more people rather than just putting more transit on Yonge.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top