Union Station LRT Loop Reconfiguration (TTC, Proposed)

[Steve X]

I agree with what drum118 said about bidirectional streetcars. If the TTC wouldn't be so stubborn and buy some bidirectional streetcars, they whole project would be much cheaper with many loading platforms. Loops are completely a waste of space and when they are underground, it's a waste of money too. Many European cities operate both uni- and bidirectional trams on the same network. Some lines have loops and then extended a few km down the line with a crossover at the end. The 509, 510 and waterfront east LRT can use bidirectional streetcars while the rest can use the current fleet. Bidirectional versions can be deployed anywhere in the system too. If a unidirectional car end up at the loop, it's no the end of the world as it can be driven out from the rear with controls.

I don't support a surface line on Bay however. I think all the intersections south of Queen would be blocked with traffic even with Bay completely closed off to traffic or streetcars in ROW. I like the idea of a Bay subway (a "stadtbahn" line). That would cost billions and probably unnecessary till the 2040s. The problem is Union Station and the PATH are in the way. Any subway north of the loop would need to be 30m deep at least. I don't know what secret storage rooms are underneath the PATH from those big banks building (if any).

 

[ShonTron]

At first look, I quite like that idea. The 509 and, let's call the QQ East Line the 519, could be served by double-ended streetcars - maybe ordered from those 30 optional cars in that BBD contract. That would actually make up for any Alstom Cars that Metrolinx purchases for its LRT lines.

 

[Leo_Chan]

Here's a solution: Extend the subway U south to Queens Quay

 

[Kitsune]

... why not just remove the HOV lane on Bay, ban left turns and run the streetcar to bloor with a cumberland > bel aire > and that just wide enough critchly lane loop, providing easy access to Bay Station and without the need for entirely new stock then can run only one one line. Run the 510 to Bay Station instead of Union and have the 509 serve both QQE and QQW.

 

[DSC]

I think we may be veering into the "Transit Fantasy Maps" thread here! See: http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threads/transit-fantasy-maps.3005/

 

[Steve X]

At first look, I quite like that idea. The 509 and, let's call the QQ East Line the 519, could be served by double-ended streetcars - maybe ordered from those 30 optional cars in that BBD contract. That would actually make up for any Alstom Cars that Metrolinx purchases for its LRT lines.

It is highly unlikely TTC would buy another model. It's not just the training cost but TTC loves to hoard up part supplies for quick repairs. Buying 30 cars from Alstom means renting another storage and hoarding another bunch of parts.

30 bidirectional streetcars won't be enough for the near future. 510 needs 14 and the 509 needs 7. That's 24 including spares already. This doesn't include growth. Normally only 8 of the 510s goes to Union but since they change runs all the time, the entire 510 needs them. There is a need for a Waterfront West LRT, the East Bayfront LRT and Portlands LRT (if it's a separate line). With the growing number of condos and for the sake of good transit priority, running two car train consists might be necessary. The Waterfront west LRT need at least 30 cars depending on where it ends. If it's Long Branch instead of Park Lawn, maybe 35-40. What goes east needs 20-30 cars at least. We are taking about a fleet of at least 80-100 cars and a new carhouse.

 

[BurlOak]

The proposed expansion of Union Loop is obsolete and will never meet the demand loads once the Waterfront is built out. It never did back in 2008. At $400 million plus and counting, will not meet the Waterfront Transit Reset plan.

It can't meet today standards and will be an operation nightmare in the coming years.

It may be true, but we made our bed and its time to lay in it. With the CIBC project approved, we are stuck with pedestrians walking from the Lake to Union.

 

[W. K. Lis]

It is highly unlikely TTC would buy another model. It's not just the training cost but TTC loves to hoard up part supplies for quick repairs. Buying 30 cars from Alstom means renting another storage and hoarding another bunch of parts.

30 bidirectional streetcars won't be enough for the near future. 510 needs 14 and the 509 needs 7. That's 24 including spares already. This doesn't include growth. Normally only 8 of the 510s goes to Union but since they change runs all the time, the entire 510 needs them. There is a need for a Waterfront West LRT, the East Bayfront LRT and Portlands LRT (if it's a separate line). With the growing number of condos and for the sake of good transit priority, running two car train consists might be necessary. The Waterfront west LRT need at least 30 cars depending on where it ends. If it's Long Branch instead of Park Lawn, maybe 35-40. What goes east needs 20-30 cars at least. We are taking about a fleet of at least 80-100 cars and a new carhouse.

The TTC may want to order an additional 60 new streetcars, on top of the current 204. They don't have to be with Bombardier, and they could change the specs to be double-ended.

 

[dowlingm]

It is highly unlikely TTC would buy another model. It's not just the training cost but TTC loves to hoard up part supplies for quick repairs. Buying 30 cars from Alstom means renting another storage and hoarding another bunch of parts.

30 bidirectional streetcars won't be enough for the near future. 510 needs 14 and the 509 needs 7. That's 24 including spares already. This doesn't include growth. Normally only 8 of the 510s goes to Union but since they change runs all the time, the entire 510 needs them. There is a need for a Waterfront West LRT, the East Bayfront LRT and Portlands LRT (if it's a separate line). With the growing number of condos and for the sake of good transit priority, running two car train consists might be necessary. The Waterfront west LRT need at least 30 cars depending on where it ends. If it's Long Branch instead of Park Lawn, maybe 35-40. What goes east needs 20-30 cars at least. We are taking about a fleet of at least 80-100 cars and a new carhouse.

I would see the double end cars being Bombardiers, from Metrolinx's committed orders (with SRT and now Sheppard East binned) and the TTC options dropped - I think that was Shontron's point too.

With TTC committed to 204, plus 6-10 extras as compensation for earlier screwups, that gives a single end fleet size of 210ish. A double end car fleet of 50 for a 264 total assuming no Hillcrest Division or other storage would be respectable - after all, that's how many ALRVs we have. However these cars would be lower capacity (especially seating) because of the double doors and double cabs.

[Edit - a double end QQE service could turn back within the street allowance, freeing up the land reserved for Parliament Loop]

 

[Rainforest]

Looks like there are two viable solutions: either a Bay streetcar line mostly on surface, or a new underground loop located south of the rail tracks and serving exclusively Waterfront East.

Bay underground streetcar is not going to happen, too much costs and too much conflicts with utilities, the Path, subway tunnel at Union, and the future Relief Line tunnel.

Creation of a semi-exlusive right-of-way on Bay is not rocket science and is certainly doable. I've seen a design in a few European cities, the two central lanes are legally reserved for the streetcars, but there is no physical barriers (except at the stops, to protect the riders waiting there), thus if there is a physical blockage, cars can use the streetcar lane to bypass the blockage.

There may be an issue with getting from Queens Quay to Front, I am not sure if the Waterfront East streetcars can run safely on surface on top of the existing tunnel. I wouldn't shift the Waterfront West service to the Bay surface line, it would be too much traffic, likely best to keep using the existing underground tunnel and loop for Waterfront West.

 

[DSC]

Those commenting on East Bayfront transit possibilities and pit-falls may want to look at the East Bayfront Transit EA Report. It describes the constraints and the options quite well and not much has changed since it was written.

http://www.waterfrontoronto.ca/nbe/...&CACHEID=611b92f5-1201-48ff-ac74-2f3de96dc609

 

[Rainforest]

Those commenting on East Bayfront transit possibilities and pit-falls may want to look at the East Bayfront Transit EA Report. It describes the constraints and the options quite well and not much has changed since it was written.

http://www.waterfrontoronto.ca/nbe/...&CACHEID=611b92f5-1201-48ff-ac74-2f3de96dc609

Thanks for the link.

However, that report did not look at any alternatives to operating both Waterfront East and Waterfront West services off the expanded Union loop.

If there are concerns that the existing loop, even once expanded, cannot handle the expected service level, then other terminus options should be considered.

That may be a completely new loop serving exclusively Waterfront East and located south of the rail tracks, perhaps in the basement of the planned new CIBC / Go Bus building. A longer walk to the Union Stn platforms would be involved, perhaps 200 m instead of 50 m. The existing loop would continue serving the Waterfront West route, and may not need to be expanded at all.

Or, that may be a surface streetcar route up Bay street.

 

[Steve X]

Those commenting on East Bayfront transit possibilities and pit-falls may want to look at the East Bayfront Transit EA Report. It describes the constraints and the options quite well and not much has changed since it was written.

http://www.waterfrontoronto.ca/nbe/...&CACHEID=611b92f5-1201-48ff-ac74-2f3de96dc609

Unidirectional streetcars was the only option back then. Now that the TTC is switching to pantographs and will eventually install a new switch system, bidirectional cars can be considered. I imagine they could use a terminal design like Kipling with a crossover which can speed up loading and avoid having all the streetcars stuck if one breaks down in the loop. They can even split into 3 or 4 tracks with different platforms employing the Spanish solution allowing both riders to disembark/embark the LRV at the same time. All of this is not possible with a loop. Spadina Station is a complete mess a that loop that is too tiny.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Well, they are still "thinking" about the Union Station loop?

See the Waterfront Transit Reset Public Meeting Presentation at this link. Go to page 33 and onward.

 

[Johnny Au]

Option B would be great for those wanting to watch the Leafs and/or the Raptors at the Air Canada Centre Scotiabank Arena.