W. K. Lis said:
And they have an electric (street) railway, the Union Billy Bishop Local, running from Union Station and past the Bathurst & Queen's Quay stop. And at a cheaper fare than the Union Pearson Express.

Now if only they could build a weather protecting walkway from the stop to the tunnel entrance.
Click to expand...

I seem to remember older schematics, before the design was finalized, that showed the tunnel continuing northward and having a second entrance at the southwest corner of Queens Quay and Bathurst.

Regardless, I think surface connections is still an outstanding issue when it comes to the formal assessment process of expanding the airport. A tunnel extension from the tunnel's current north terminus is one option. I believe redirecting the 509 or the 511 is another option. If streetcar services could be brought to the end of Eireann Quay, it could open up discussions to improve streetcar service elsewhere.

I'd like to see more information on where Billy Bishop travellers go to and come from. But I can think of a scenario where :
  • The Waterfront West LRT gets built, replacing the 509;
  • The 511 is redirected to continue south, terminating at Eireann Quay; and
  • The roads and streetcar tracks are reconfigured between Queens Quay and Lake Shore, allowing faster and perhaps grade-separated service on both routes in this area.
 
I don't think that the 511 can be redirected -- it's currently very well used by people who live in the area throughout the year and is packed during special events. Having all of those people take the 509 for a couple of stops and then transfer to the 511 wouldn't work well, as the 509 is also very well used by people who live in the area.

I think it would make more sense (if it were logistically possible) for the 509 to do a loop at the airport, given that it starts/ends at Union Station and would likely be of more use to passengers than the 511.
 
Or people could just continue to use the Porter shuttle that departs across the road from Union Station and does not require a TTC fare...

It looks like I will get to use the new tunnel at the end of August for a work trip. I would have preferred to fly AC out of YYZ but their pricing was more than double than what Porter was asking. Not a good sign for them!
 
I just witnessed about 10 minutes ago a C-17 (http://www.rcaf-arc.forces.gc.ca/en/aircraft-current/cc-177.page) attempt a landing at the airport. At first - it was pointed straight at me on the boardwalk at H2O park only to a few seconds later shift course. It only pulled up at the very last second about 30-40 feet above the water. What I wonder if this was an accident or a training run as these aircraft are capable of landing on the island airport. I also wonder if we'll hear No Jets TO complain about this, as it is a four engine jet aircraft.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
I can't see how it can happen without extending that tunnel across the airfield.

AoD
Click to expand...

Yep...and at what cost is that....and I think that becomes a public cost because I think the largesse of the airport operators only extended to taking needed services over with the tunnel....doubt if they would finance anything more via airport fees.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
I can't see how it can happen without extending that tunnel across the airfield.

AoD
Click to expand...

I know it's just academic given the differences between pedestrian vs. utility, but didn't they already tunnel under the airport anyway for the late-addition city water/sewer main aspect of the project?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top