[drum118]

Drum wants this solution, and Steve Munro wanted it 30yrs ago - arguing, *rightfully*, that the current loop is grossly insufficient. But I dunno, I just don't think it'd work well. Yes, even as a pedestrian-only street. There are too many pedestrians, too many cross-streets with too high volume, too many unknowns like need for future midblock crossings. This is the core area of the city, so by default and sheer logic a surface line would be slow, suffer from issues like bunching, and be over-capacity. Yes even in a pedestrian mall. This isn't rocket-science. Large cities realized this issue well over a century ago. Any line through such an area needs to be grade-separated. That's what gave rise to subways and streetcar-subways (i.e. LRT/stadtbahn/pre-metro type lines).

We've already done the hard part by creating half a km of tunneled streetcar from QQ to Union, so it seems most logical to expand on that. And we can do that by bookending via a second tunnel up Freeland/Yonge and across to Bay to create one seamless keystone in a +20km waterfront LRT line. This is why I'll always support going back to the Loop Extension option.

I am going to have to look for numbers pertaining to ridership numbers back in 2008, as I am sure they were higher than now.

The current proposal for the expansion was around about 5,000 by 2030 for both lines at peak time with the east being higher numbers. Based on current density plan for the east section that is now 6 times plus higher than plan, you are going to see an 509E about every 90 seconds or less by 2041, if not sooner. Bulk of riders will be outbound from start of service to late afternoon for weekday and a good part of the weekend for non summer service. Come summer months, ridership will spike due to people wanting to get to the island, the Ex and other events.

Since 2004, I have heard nothing about bitching due to quality of service on Queens Quay to the point TTC hasn't done nothing about it. Since that time, the Fort York Area has been built as well Liberty Village along with the final parts of City Place. adding more riders to the lines.

At some future point, you are going to have 509W/510 down to every 2-3 minutes compare what we see today.

With the Bremmer Line now off the table, it will reduce the impact on operation in the tunnel, but your key point will be for the 3 lines getting to/from the new platforms. Until TTC removes schedule departure time from the loop, it will have an impact how cars can gain access to a platform. It needs to be stop and go. It will only take small things to back up the line for cars getting to the new loop that you can cause another backup at the platforms as well in the tunnel.

You will have pinch point regardless if the line is on the surface or in the tunnel and that is at the T junction. The plan from day one was to have various cars pass the loop that will be part of other lines servicing the Waterfront. Even if you remove these bypassing cars, there will be issues for cars getting to/from the loop.

As it stands under my proposal to to have surface lines at Union, you have room for 4 platforms with Bay close to traffic. You have 2 tracks between QQ and Harbour; 3/4 tracks between Harbour and Lake Shore; 4 tracks from Lake Shore to Front with 2 tracks going north of Front. There will be crossovers from Harbour to Union to allow cars to use X track to get to/from Union based on what taking place at Union. Cars going north of Front would be in the current northbound lanes and it would allow all cars to use it since service would be less going north, but could still have an impact on the whole service for Union.

It has been the goal from my point of view to do everything pertaining to transit on the Waterfront Cheap, regardless the impact on riders for the last 5 years by council.

I Strongly Recommend Everyone Write Comments Pertaining To Union to Mayor Tory One Way Or Another.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

It's incredible how politicians have transformed over the past 50 years. From having the foresight to anticipate demand and build projects to handle increasing demand, to cheapening out wherever possible where demand is needed the most and building white elephants where there is zero demand.

I'd wager we're going to see a moving walkway since city council is just waiting to display their sheer stupidity.

It would help - if the electorate had more confidence in government's ability to spend money well. The city is not perfect, but is reasonably run. Mrs. Wynne and Mr. McGuinty have a murkier record, and that will allow politicians like Doug Ford the chance to exploit people's fears over how their money is spent even though these are two distinct levels of government.

I can't help but think that a large part of it has been the raising costs of infrastructure over the decades.

A lot of infrastructure is just prohibitively expensive. Rising labour costs, material cost, overregulation, inability to proceed with pragmatic expropriaton, lack of competition in RFPs, they have all contributed.

 

[TransitBart]

I can't help but think that a large part of it has been the raising costs of infrastructure over the decades.

A lot of infrastructure is just prohibitively expensive. Rising labour costs, material cost, overregulation, inability to proceed with pragmatic expropriaton, lack of competition in RFPs, they have all contributed.

That is all very true. Think of the staircase the gentleman in Etobicoke built this summer for a fraction of the city’s quoted cost. To Mr or Ms Person on the street, prices in the millions and billions are unfathomable. I myself have trouble with the GO Station construction costs. @smallspy challenged me and I understand his counterpoint, but seriously, $20 million for two slabs of concrete. Fancy slabs, but concrete slabs nonetheless.

 

[drum118]

I should note, the Union Loop can be out of action from a weekend to a year as many as 5 times to build the new loop.

Building the new platforms will have next to no impact on service in the tunnel since it will behind the current wall there now.

You need a weekend to cut in new switches to/from the exist track to the new platform and there is 4 of them. This is subject to what happens for rebuilding the exist portal to allow for a T connection. It may take up to a year to rebuild the portal as it will most likely require the existing ramp to be shift west to allow a flat section for the T junction. Depending on where the platform is in construction, you could cut in the new switches while the line is close, requiring only one closure, not the 5. If the portal is done before the platform, then you are going to have closure for the switches. If you want to do all the switches at the same time, then you could be looking at a week or 2 closure of the loop.

The best option for platforms is on the east side that will allow a connection to the new bus terminal. When time comes to use the new platform, you block off the existing one and do what has to be done at night for it.

 

[M II A II R II K]

Or to save money they could go with elevated streetcars from Union.

 

[Adjei]

Watch these morons cheap out on this but then spend 4 billion and rising on a one stop subway.

 

[Leo_Chan]

Watch these morons cheap out on this but then spend 4 billion and rising on a one stop subway.

Should we expect council to use this argument to spend more?

 

[rbt]

Watch these morons cheap out on this but then spend 4 billion and rising on a one stop subway.

I don't think they will cheap out on this project. It's pre-election. Federal money is committed and there's a good chance the person making the provincial contribution won't need to deal with the ramifications of the spending.

So, that leaves Tory seeking re-election spending (mostly) money from other peoples budget problems. A spread of projects makes re-election most likely and $500M is ultimately a very cheap project to lock-in downtown votes.

If the province doesn't kick in, then Tory wins in 2 ways; doesn't need to actually build anything (or raise funds to do it) and still gets the votes for looking like he tried.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

The connection between Union Station and the Waterfront is essential.

I'd take getting it right here over somewhere else in the city. If this is the place that can get some of Toronto's share of the federal funding, then it should receive it.

 

[BurlOak]

Watch these morons cheap out on this but then spend 4 billion and rising on a one stop subway.

What every transit project should look at is the "bang for the buck". It is essential to know what the "bucks" are - as those should be able to be determined reasonably accurate. The "bang" depends on ridership projections, as well as transit rider desires, and it harder to quantify accurately. Here are my cost estimates:
Option A. Expanded Loop ($275M).
QQE portal ($25M) and Interchange ($50M) and Loop Expansion ($200M).
Option B. Underground Walkway ($100M).
QQE portal ($25M) and Interchange ($25M) and walkway ($50M).
Option C. Underground Funicular ($150M).
QQE portal ($25M) and Interchange ($25M) and funicular ($100M).
Option G. Freeland Loop ($235M).
QQE portal ($25M) and underground track (900mx$150M=$135M) and underground station ($50M), and underground intersections ($25M).
Option D. On street LRT ($290M)
QQE reconstruction ($25M) and 3.5km onstreet (3.5x$75M = $265M)
Option E. Part underground LRT ($600M).
QQE portal ($25M) and Interchange ($25M) and under subway ($150M) and part underground track (800mx$150M=$120M) and 3 stations (3@$50M=$150) and Queen portal ($25M).
Option F. Fully underground LRT ($1050M)
QQE portal ($25M) and Interchange ($25M) and under subway ($150M) and underground track (3kmx$150M=$450M) and 3 stations (7@$50M=$350) and underground loop ($25M).

If service is only to Union Station - I would say the Freeland Loop (option G) would be the best. The "bang" of each of these is in the same order of magnitude, although likely Union loop is best, followed closely by the Freeland Loop.

If service is to continue through downtown, then the cost vary substantially. The service would also vary substantially since, even if Bay is closed, there are some heavy east-west routes that would slow things down.

 

[dowlingm]

What every transit project should look at is the "bang for the buck". It is essential to know what the "bucks" are - as those should be able to be determined reasonably accurate. The "bang" depends on ridership projections, as well as transit rider desires, and it harder to quantify accurately. Here are my cost estimates:

A cost estimate which involves tunnelling under a subway line and a major water-sewer line and the PATH and other infrastructure adjoining/under Bay Street seems to me to be an exercise in futility unless you have access to a lot more information than this board customarily does, and even then there will be significant amounts of legacy infrastructure which is simply not listed in any GIS or extant map.

When LUAS C was built through Dublin's financial services district, it was hassled at every turn by the finance companies who wanted the builders to insure no unplanned disruptions because an unmapped cable or pipe was cut. The same will apply here except even more so given the far more dense environment (which is something the folks who kept touting bringing DRL south of Queen never seemed to fathom).

We have seen the financial and time overruns at the new build Spadina stations and the retrofit of Union Station. Even "simple" second exit, fare gate and elevator projects inch along, and there doesn't seem to be anything different which can be done. The more we try to do, the longer we will have to do without the stuff that we have already.

EDIT: one more thing - remember City Council cut and run when it came to doing Queen's Quay East once before, and talked about BRT. Who really thinks they have the minerals to push an underground streetcar up Bay Street?

 

[Rainforest]

What every transit project should look at is the "bang for the buck". It is essential to know what the "bucks" are - as those should be able to be determined reasonably accurate. The "bang" depends on ridership projections, as well as transit rider desires, and it harder to quantify accurately. Here are my cost estimates:
Option A. Expanded Loop ($275M).
QQE portal ($25M) and Interchange ($50M) and Loop Expansion ($200M).
Option B. Underground Walkway ($100M).
QQE portal ($25M) and Interchange ($25M) and walkway ($50M).
Option C. Underground Funicular ($150M).
QQE portal ($25M) and Interchange ($25M) and funicular ($100M).
Option G. Freeland Loop ($235M).
QQE portal ($25M) and underground track (900mx$150M=$135M) and underground station ($50M), and underground intersections ($25M).
Option D. On street LRT ($290M)
QQE reconstruction ($25M) and 3.5km onstreet (3.5x$75M = $265M)
Option E. Part underground LRT ($600M).
QQE portal ($25M) and Interchange ($25M) and under subway ($150M) and part underground track (800mx$150M=$120M) and 3 stations (3@$50M=$150) and Queen portal ($25M).
Option F. Fully underground LRT ($1050M)
QQE portal ($25M) and Interchange ($25M) and under subway ($150M) and underground track (3kmx$150M=$450M) and 3 stations (7@$50M=$350) and underground loop ($25M).

If service is only to Union Station - I would say the Freeland Loop (option G) would be the best. The "bang" of each of these is in the same order of magnitude, although likely Union loop is best, followed closely by the Freeland Loop.

If service is to continue through downtown, then the cost vary substantially. The service would also vary substantially since, even if Bay is closed, there are some heavy east-west routes that would slow things down.

View attachment 122234

Thanks for taking time to think about it and make the sketches, but Options E and F do not seem doable. The current streetcar tunnel ends at the same level as the subway tracks, rebuilding it to go under the tracks would come with an astronomical cost, for a relatively small number of riders.

Viable options are A, D, and G. Option G looks interesting, although it may be no cheaper than A while being slightly less convenient than A.

 

[W. K. Lis]

I thought there was an environmental assessment done for the expanded Union Station streetcar loop? Did someone (Mayor Ford?) delay it for so long, that a new assessment has to be done, costing us more money because of the delays?

 

[drum118]

I thought there was an environmental assessment done for the expanded Union Station streetcar loop? Did someone (Mayor Ford?) delay it for so long, that a new assessment has to be done, costing us more money because of the delays?

The current EA for Union is still alive, its the lack of funding from TTC is the problem. Since TTC gets funding from the City, the city has refused to fund the expansion.

Because Waterfront Toronto has been putting pressure on the city, council chose to do this study to see if there were other options that were never look at during the various EA's to find a cheaper way of doing it.

As I stated in the past, both current option for B & C where looked at in detail during the study and were rejected like they should be today.

As for BurOak 6 plans, A & D are the only 2 options that will work.

Option D & F would require Bay St to be dug up to replace the current tunnel since it will have to slope about 60 feet down from where it is to get a new platform under the subway. You are digging up Lake Ontario since this area was where the lake used to be back in the 1800's and was fill in because of the railway. Lake Ontario Shore line was Front St and the The Esplanade. The cost for this area alone is not worth the cost to take line north.

Option G has been looked a number of times during the EA as well the past 5 years and has been rejected by Metrolinx for various reason who is not willing to work with the city on having a combine transit hub for their new bus terminal location.

 

[drum118]

This will show where TTC is on this loop

https://www.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Co...s/1_Proposed_2018-2027_TTC_Capital_Budget.pdf