Waterfront Transit Reset Phase 1 Study

[JSF-1]

^^^ But again, this begs the question..........what is this line going to do that a bi-articulated bus can't do in it's own ROW? If this line needs a complete re-work of Union then it's not worth it. In nearly every other city on the planet, they could build a 4km subway at this price with a billion left to spare. I am NOT saying that Toronto will not need superior transit to serve this area but not at any price.

Gov't spending is all about priorities. You have X amount of dollars so you spend it where you will get the most bang for your buck. Is this little line worth not bringing electrified GO to hundreds of thousands of more passengers or building 100s of KM of BRT lanes serving every area of the city and not just the precious few who can afford to live at the Waterfront? How can Toronto complain they have no money to upgrade their antiquated switching system on it's current large streetcar system when they are blowing $3 billion for a 4 km line?

There is no way, in hell, that this line should be coming in at even half this price and if they got someone to come over to Europe to build it, it wouldn't even be a third the price. Transit should be viewed as any other infrastructure project and determine it's worth on a cost-benefit analysis and the benefits received against the money spent on this project simple cannot be justified.

Ok but there are a couple of issues with your bi-articulated bus idea, firstly where would we maintain these bi-articulated buses? None of the city's bus garages are equipped to handle 80' buses meaning that one of the garages in the city would need to be retrofitted with new equipment solely for these buses. Secondly are bi-articulated buses even road legal in Ontario? How many drivers would need to be trained to operate these buses because a bi-articulated bus handles differently from a single articulated bus. Finally is it really worth buying a fleet of buses that may only end up being used on a single route? Sure you can try to justify other routes around Toronto that could use them but those corridors are limited and it would require retrofitting even more garages with new equipment for these longer buses.

 

[drum118]

Last i heard it was not 100% sure they would have a Y junction at Queen's Quay with a 'straight-through' option due to engineering complications but it would clearly be best to have one as it would allow much greater flexibility.

The plan was to have was to have QQE as s separate line from the 509 with the ability to bypass service when needed. That still seems to what Waterfront wants to see on day one from talking to WT the last year though TTC will be calling the shot. Once the Cherry St extension happens, it offer another way for West Don Land to have service to Union with the 504 been split with one branch to Union and the other branch to the Commissioner loop.

At the same time, a car from Broadview station could run to Union. There are a number of options how service could operate along the waterfront. If and when the expansion for the EX loop take place to Dufferin Loop, you can have the current 504 running duel direction service along the waterfront.

With this project being delay by 16 years so far, turn over in TTC over the years has brought in a new batch of planers who will look at all options how the waterfront line could operate that will offer better service to the network. As more of the line is built, it will change more like having the new Broadview extension line going to Union around 2050.

We will have to wait until the next step take place as to see what been looked at now.

 

[GameOnBrad]

My problem is the human aspect of bi-articulated buses (or human geography of it). I've ridden the 509 Streetcar during rush hour many times. It's packed with a serious amount of people waiting for 1 or 2 streetcars after (I was one of them on a whole bunch of occasions).

From my understanding, bi-articulated buses hold significantly less passengers than a streetcar can. I can only imagine what the backlog would be then at Union Station, not just heading west, but with all the density planned on the east side, I cringe at the thought.

 

[IRT_BMT_IND]

Also, what exactly is this line going to be able to do that a double articulated bus can't? It's not like this line is going to be rapid transit, it's just a streetcar in it's own ROW.

The big issue is the tunnel, without the tunnel it's very hard to make a BRT that can access Union Station, the traffic in the area is just too dense. Even if full private right of ways were built, there would still be issues re: intersections being blocked, and the typical light cycle at Lakeshore would likely be longer than the peak headway. There also is no real space for adequate transfer or looping facilities for buses at Union, unless you want people to just wait on the street. So a BRT would probably have to feed the Ontario line instead.

 

[drum118]

This line really does exemplify why Toronto has such a small rapid transit system for it's size. $3 billion for a 4km streetcar is nothing short of obscene. Let's say it costs $500 million to make the connection at Union, where are they spending the other $2.5 billion?

Also, what exactly is this line going to be able to do that a double articulated bus can't? It's not like this line is going to be rapid transit, it's just a streetcar in it's own ROW. Just because a vehicle has steel wheels doesn't mean it's fast, just go ask the people in NW Toronto that about their "rapid transit" LRT. Why would this be any different? Wasn't it Einstein who said "the definition of stupid is trying something once and it doesn't work and then trying it again and hoping for a different result"?

This kind of money could easily connect Sheppard station and Sheppard West or buy an entire fleet of BEMU for GO serving thousands of more destinations, hundreds of thousands of more passengers, and millions of more people and still have lots of money left over for a complete BRT ROW.

This really is a shocking misallocation of precious transit funds and after it's all said and done, all Torontonians are going to get is stub of a Finch line while Montreal is getting 64km of automated true rapid transit for just $8 billion. That should put into perspective how ridiculous this is.

How many places have bi-directional buses??

We rode Alstom STE6 Translohr Tram bi-directional tram/bus in Venice and the surrounding area area and a very rough ride. it also needs a centre guideway to keep it straight with the driver still needing a steering wheel. It is a three section and no different than a three section bi-directional bus that has a pan on it. In 2012, rode a number of systems with three section articulated buses and in 2022, we did not see any of them for those systems. I wouldn't ride that third section again as it give one rough ride

End of the day, bi-directional bus will not handle the ridership

 

[drum118]

I should note that a triple section articulated and bi-directional bus do not exist in NA and would have to go under approval testing before been allow on the road. Since the Alstom STE6 Translohr Tram use a guideway and overhead, it has a better chance getting approval without the testing stage.

If TTC Flexity has an issue carrying riders today on 509/510 on QQW, none of the 3 models will work for QQE. By the time you got approval to allow any of the 3 models on the road, the Flexity would be already serving QQE.

As a noted, the Bay tunnels would have to be fully be rebuilt to allow buses to use that tunnel with wider tunnel and rebuilding QQ station.

 

[ssiguy2]

First of all I never said anything about a bi-directional bus, although they are an option, but rather bi-articulated buses. These electric buses can now be up to 28 meters which is hardly much of a gap of the current 34 meter streetcars. Remember that much of the massive growth in the area will also be served by the Ontario Line and vastly increased GO service, assuming ML every gets around to offering it. Also, why does Union need a streetcar loop for this line when they can just run standard bi-direction trains. They already use them on Eglinton & Finch so what's the problem? As for the legality of bi-articulated buses, they can become legal with the stroke of a pen like UPX and OTrain was.

This amount of money for a little stub of a non-rapid {and rest assured it WON'T be rapid transit} would be comical if it wasn't so obscene. This money seems like the City has built bureaucracy, corruption, and incompetence into the line before shovels even hit the ground. Let's say this Union section costs a billion, although there is no reason it should, and the Cherry tunnel costs $200 million, that leaves a whopping $2 billion unaccounted for less 3 paltry KM. How many fingers are in this pie?

This is scandalous and if it even comes in at just half this price it will still go down in history as this planet's most expensive streetcar. If this goes ahead, I hope the City will never bitch about transit funding again but, unfortunately after the politicians and politically connected businesses have gotten their share of the largess, it will still be the long suffering transit users of Toronto that will pay the price.

 

[DSCToronto]

First of all I never said anything about a bi-directional bus, although they are an option, but rather bi-articulated buses. These electric buses can now be up to 28 meters which is hardly much of a gap of the current 34 meter streetcars. Remember that much of the massive growth in the area will also be served by the Ontario Line and vastly increased GO service, assuming ML every gets around to offering it. Also, why does Union need a streetcar loop for this line when they can just run standard bi-direction trains. They already use them on Eglinton & Finch so what's the problem? As for the legality of bi-articulated buses, they can become legal with the stroke of a pen like UPX and OTrain was.

This amount of money for a little stub of a non-rapid {and rest assured it WON'T be rapid transit} would be comical if it wasn't so obscene. This money seems like the City has built bureaucracy, corruption, and incompetence into the line before shovels even hit the ground. Let's say this Union section costs a billion, although there is no reason it should, and the Cherry tunnel costs $200 million, that leaves a whopping $2 billion unaccounted for less 3 paltry KM. How many fingers are in this pie?

This is scandalous and if it even comes in at just half this price it will still go down in history as this planet's most expensive streetcar. If this goes ahead, I hope the City will never bitch about transit funding again but, unfortunately after the politicians and politically connected businesses have gotten their share of the largess, it will still be the long suffering transit users of Toronto that will pay the price.

Time to move on, please!

 

[JasonParis]

I really think the QQE “LRT” should serve as a model for what Toronto’s downtown streetcar network could evolve into. That means wider stop spacing focused on major intersections and destinations, level boarding, double-point switches, double-ended vehicles, and truly aggressive transit priority.

Yes, this would likely require rethinking intersecting routes like the 509, 510, and 511—but that’s the point. If we’re serious about building a faster, more reliable surface network, we should upgrade them at the same time rather than settling for incremental change.