• Thread starter Suicidal Gingerbread Man
  • Start date
I believe there was to be another bridge from Backstage to the TPA garage - not sure when / if that is to be built though. I imagine funding will be lined up as a bridge into Backstage with an otherwise dead end corridor would be rather silly.

I believe the corridor runs below the pool in the south end. There is a gap between the TPA garage (flat roof above car entrance) and backstage.
I'm not sure where the UP train is heading. They must be lost.
09FE0F5D-0593-4CF4-BDF7-C14E0E2FEFA8.jpeg
 

Attachments

  • 09FE0F5D-0593-4CF4-BDF7-C14E0E2FEFA8.jpeg
    09FE0F5D-0593-4CF4-BDF7-C14E0E2FEFA8.jpeg
    395.8 KB · Views: 1,029
I believe the corridor runs below the pool in the south end. There is a gap between the TPA garage (flat roof above car entrance) and backstage.
I'm not sure where the UP train is heading. They must be lost.
View attachment 157918

Funny enough I was on the UP yesterday when it went East through Union.. figured it was due to track work, and sure enough it did go back through Union on a different track.
 
We've put up a front page story that details many of the design refinements. I'll note that I think the new plan for the pedestrian plaza on Bay and the new pavilion with vertical access to the PATH and park makes better use of space… but to go up to the park now, you'll need to do three switchbacks on the escalators to go all the way up. That might make the elevators more popular.

Meanwhile, the PATH route in the area, like south and west of Union, will not be conducive to long walks through the system on anything but the worst weather days. Why? Because PATH to cross Bay will take you over it on a bridge, before requiring you to take drop back to ground level until you're east of the mid-block staircase up to the park here, then have you rise up again to clear Yonge Street. At least it's an up-down of just one storey here, as opposed to a two-storey up-down that we are getting to access 16 York on the west side. Sigh…

42
 
We've put up a front page story that details many of the design refinements. I'll note that I think the new plan for the pedestrian plaza on Bay and the new pavilion with vertical access to the PATH and park makes better use of space… but to go up to the park now, you'll need to do three switchbacks on the escalators to go all the way up. That might make the elevators more popular.

Meanwhile, the PATH route in the area, like south and west of Union, will not be conducive to long walks through the system on anything but the worst weather days. Why? Because PATH to cross Bay will take you over it on a bridge, before requiring you to take drop back to ground level until you're east of the mid-block staircase up to the park here, then have you rise up again to clear Yonge Street. At least it's an up-down of just one storey here, as opposed to a two-storey up-down that we are getting to access 16 York on the west side. Sigh…

42
Have fun looking at the PATH connections proposed in the LCBO Block. The future provision to access the Loblaws block will require a user to take a pair of elevators. Other access ways involve multiple level changes.
 
Have fun looking at the PATH connections proposed in the LCBO Block. The future provision to access the Loblaws block will require a user to take a pair of elevators. Other access ways involve multiple level changes.
Yeah, no, I've gone all through it for all of the proposals, and it's all cray-cray south of Front Street, both east and west. It'll be strictly a bad weather alternative only as all of the grade changes will make people mental.

42
 
Future home of 141 Bay. Backstage is in the way but you get the picture. Probably a restricted view of the CN tower view from this angle in ~3-5 years.
67C214E6-C11F-418B-BCBA-69B328452A24.jpeg
CF0612DF-63D9-4EFF-92D6-0498B529F307.jpeg
 

Attachments

  • CF0612DF-63D9-4EFF-92D6-0498B529F307.jpeg
    CF0612DF-63D9-4EFF-92D6-0498B529F307.jpeg
    287.2 KB · Views: 679
  • 67C214E6-C11F-418B-BCBA-69B328452A24.jpeg
    67C214E6-C11F-418B-BCBA-69B328452A24.jpeg
    261.6 KB · Views: 658
Last edited:
off topic but man that rail corridor looks crappy. Would be nice for all those looking down on it if it had a more consistent look (rather than the dogs breakfast it is now).
 
off topic but man that rail corridor looks crappy. Would be nice for all those looking down on it if it had a more consistent look (rather than the dogs breakfast it is now).
All we need is those billions for the rail deck park...and also to extend it out this far East...
Fingers crossed lol
 
All we need is those billions for the rail deck park...and also to extend it out this far East...
Fingers crossed lol

Yeah, the City of Toronto has bigger fish to fry than spend billions of dollars on rail deck parks,
believe me, the only way we will ever see any rail deck proposals come to reality is with private sector funds and you know what that means...'you got to give a little to get a little, or maybe give a lot to get a lot, haha
 
As it should be!
No. As our sidewalks are not getting much wider, we need need more pedestrianized space. If you're going to build a system that creates that space, but which is unappealing to use, you defeat the purpose. You also waste money, people's time, create congestion issues, and potentially compromise people's safety. I'm not saying that I do not care about lively sidewalks, but I do believe the City's forecasts regarding the numbers of pedestrians that expect will be walking between places like the Sugar Wharf and Pinnacle One Yonge developments and the core.

42
 
I'm kind of confused with the new pedestrian bridge on the north side at Bay St. Is it a completely new bridge or Union Station Platform 3 with the wall replaced?
 

Back
Top