I just had a stellar idea. How about a Bay streetcar that begins it's journey at Dupont Station, heads east along Dupont then heads south-east on Davenport before heading south on Bay to Union. It then connects to the Harbourfront LRT and loops at Queens Quay providing those in the core with uninterrupted service to the waterfront. And finally getting streetcars back on Bay Street!

How about a Bay streetcar that begins it's journey at Dupont Station, heads east along Dupont then heads south-east on Davenport before heading south on Bay to Union. It then connects to the Harbourfront LRT and loops at Queens Quay providing those in the core with uninterrupted service to the waterfront.

Slight problem here: the subway and the Union Station LRT loop have the same Top-of-Rail level (or was it the same platform level? One or the other). Otherwise, it'd be a great idea.

Anything to get rid of that retched 5 Bay. Since it (the Harbourfront LRT) aligns with Bay Street, I find it strange that they didn't think to the future for an extension north.

and c) keep it on topic, as now he's posting just for the sake of insulting other members and not even acknowledging the existence of the topic. Hey Jaye, can we ban this guy yet? He's obviously here exclusively to insult any who disagree with him - including you.

Bay and Spadina subways seems excessive; I'd gladly run LRT along Bay though... even the TTC has wished the tracks there were never torn up (I believe it was fmr CGM Ducharme that has expressed this in the past).

I don't ban that easily, last guy I banned I think was last year. I think of us all as one big nerdy family, even though we love each other, we throw insults with no hesitation. :)

No but seriously, I don't want to ban anyone.

Anything to get rid of that retched 5 Bay. Since it (the Harbourfront LRT) aligns with Bay Street, I find it strange that they didn't think to the future for an extension north.

6 Bay, 5 is Avenue Rd. :)
Luckily it is going to prove to be extremely advantageous when Union Station's new subway platform opens; the Yonge-bound subway and the LRT will share the same platform.

I think at the time the TTC was too obsessed with its "next gen LRT rapid streetcar" concept to think ahead like that. Bay St. can't accomodate a dedicated ROW, which would make the TTC unenthusiastic (I question their philosophy here, as they seem to be closed to the idea of any new mixed-traffic routes).

Then again, I don't think they are limiting the routes that they want streetcars on because of this. Think of the King proposal, I actually think the King proposal would function better on Bay inbetween Queen and Front.

Then again, I don't think they are limiting the routes that they want streetcars on because of this. Think of the King proposal, I actually think the King proposal would function better on Bay inbetween Queen and Front.
Bay between Queen and Front is a very symbolic stretch of road, and I agree, with the exception of the west side between Adelaide and Richmond (where one building needs to maintain access by auto and cannot get it from E-W streets - this might be achieved by installing a loop flowing out of the terminus of Temperance street, eliminating the need to open up the west side of this segment of Bay St. to traffic), that stretch could actually be done as a pure transit mall (no traffic at all, except cited exception).

Bay already has streetcar tracks between Queen and College but they are only used for detours.

As regards a permanent route the length of Bay, I think this would further clog up traffic and isn't needed given that it is only blocks away from subway lines on both sides.

I think a streetcar right of way, as opposed to a Sheppard style LRT, would work best on Bay. It could run straight down from Dupont station, south-east on Davenport then finally south on Bay where it would enter a right of way. South of Dundas, Bay street could use the King street proposal. This would restrict cars to driving only one intersection before being obligated to make a right turn. South of Wellington, it could drop beneath street-level to access a reconstructed Union streetcar station - then the line could continue south to Queens Quay station, then Spadina and Queens Quay where it can loop in an existing loop (as opposed to constructing one at the foot of Bay).

^^ I'd love to see regular streetcars on Bay, Front, Parliament, Ossington, Coxell, Wellesley, and Harbourd.

LRT...not so much. We could squeeze out rush-hour lanes like on King and Queen, but everyone ignores them anyways.

Sorry, I consider streetcars as LRT. I should have been more specific and said "legacy" LRT I guess, because I am talking about the same style of trackage and network that we have today; they will cross each other after all.

What I think might be ideal is a U-Liner service with Spadina; some can and should terminate at Spadina and Queen's Quay, and some can also terminate at King (510) or Wellington via York and Adelaide (Bay Line), and the rest run through routes on each other to free up space in Union Loop.

I agree with the other streets you mentioned, but I'm skeptical on Wellesley and Harbourd, Harbourd in particular, as being viable candidates in today's climate/culture. :(

The others have all been floated before and some are even on official plans such as Front and Parliament.

Because there are no current plans for a DRL, although interest is being revived at the TTC, I'd also propose something be done with Church in combination with Bay to give as much back-up to Yonge as possible in a timely manner.

Bay already has streetcar tracks between Queen and College but they are only used for detours.

As regards a permanent route the length of Bay, I think this would further clog up traffic and isn't needed given that it is only blocks away from subway lines on both sides.

Dundas and College, but yes, there are tracks existing on some of Bay St. today.

I believe that traffic should be reduced on Bay St. to accomodate the streetcar. Yes, the subway is blocks away, but the Yonge line is overcapacity. That is why this should be seriously looked at.

I think a streetcar right of way, as opposed to a Sheppard style LRT, would work best on Bay. It could run straight down from Dupont station, south-east on Davenport then finally south on Bay where it would enter a right of way. South of Dundas, Bay street could use the King street proposal. This would restrict cars to driving only one intersection before being obligated to make a right turn. South of Wellington, it could drop beneath street-level to access a reconstructed Union streetcar station - then the line could continue south to Queens Quay station, then Spadina and Queens Quay where it can loop in an existing loop (as opposed to constructing one at the foot of Bay).

The only problem with dropping south of Wellington is that the streetcar would collide with the subway, or pass overtop the existing loop and tracks. Because Bay St. plunges downward immediately south of front street to get under Union Station's east end of the shed, I don't think it is possible to raise the existing streetcar tracks in a reconstruction.

Union Loop is going to be reconstructed, somehow. There have been previous drawings on proposals for this loop posted here before.

This one on Steve Murno's site is the best reference, I beleive. (http://www.stevemunro.ca/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/unionloopdetailc.jpg)

Note that the new wide LRT loop stretches to about Track 13 at Union Station. What is interesting here is that the existing tracks' space is freed up, and if the streetcar descends to track level while under Union Station, then a simple junction into the existing tracks and the new loop can be accomodated.

Ideally, I'd like to place a stop right in front of the GO Bus terminal, but that may not be possible. The Union Station stop might be forced to be located on the north side of Front St. since I strongly suspect there is no room for a plateau between Front St. and Track 13 (it's a ~9m descent from Front to Track 13, quite the drop).

The Beauty of Bay St.
A Gem of Grandoise Urban Planning

Union to (Old) City Hall is an old and important gateway in Toronto, and right in the middle between the two today is the heart of the entire nation's economic power. Historically and currently, this is one of the most important spaces in Toronto and also one of the most symbolic:

http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w203/TrainX/Bay/Old_city_hall_entrance.jpg
http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w203/TrainX/Bay/BayStreetTempleBuilding.jpg
http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w203/TrainX/Bay/VictoryinEuropeDayinToronto.jpg
http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w203/TrainX/Bay/streetcar-4706-78.jpg
http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w203/TrainX/Bay/OldBayStreetLively.jpg
http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w203/TrainX/Bay/OldBayStreetQuiet.jpg


Teamways below Union Station flank Bay St.

http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w203/TrainX/Bay/BayStreetTeamway.jpg

Bay St. can be salvaged from its current plight as a congested artery...

http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w203/TrainX/Bay/BayStreetSouthTraffic.jpg



...through the removal of traffic's stain on this gem...

http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w203/TrainX/Bay/ModernBayStreet.jpg


All the buildings along this stretch with the possible exception of one or two structures on the segment between Adelaide and King are accessible by their east-west arterial counterparts.

RIP Beard Tower:ohno:

This is an interesting proposal. To completely turn Bay Street into a transit corridor would be a wonderful idea.

The question is, would it even be necessary? Bay between Front and Queen is extremely accessible by subway already via a very short less than 5 minute walk from any subway station. Why would anyone even want to wait for a streetcar/LRT, wait for lights, wait for people to get on/off and stand outside when it's cold (even just from getting off the LRT to their office buildings) when they could just walk 5 mins underground in PATH or above ground when it's nice out is beyond me.

As well, because this is the CBD, there is virtually no role for the pedestrian/traffic mall to enhance street level retail into a viable 'walking district' for people on weekends to shop and so on as other places in Toronto are more suitable for such an endeavor.

I think it's a nice dream, but I don't think the usefulness of this justifies the cost of building it and running it and the hassles that it would create.


As for Bay street north of Queen, I guess it could be feasible, but yet again I wonder at how useful this would be for commuters.

The question is, would it even be necessary? Bay between Front and Queen is extremely accessible by subway already via a very short less than 5 minute walk from any subway station. Why would anyone even want to wait for a streetcar/LRT, wait for lights, wait for people to get on/off and stand outside when it's cold (even just from getting off the LRT to their office buildings) when they could just walk 5 mins underground in PATH or above ground when it's nice out is beyond me.

As well, because this is the CBD, there is virtually no role for the pedestrian/traffic mall to enhance street level retail into a viable 'walking district' for people on weekends to shop and so on as other places in Toronto are more suitable for such an endeavor.

I think it's a nice dream, but I don't think the usefulness of this justifies the cost of building it and running it and the hassles that it would create.


As for Bay street north of Queen, I guess it could be feasible, but yet again I wonder at how useful this would be for commuters.

A big part of the reason why I think this is a useful idea to float is because nobody is building any DRL and Yonge is over-capacity: it will likely remain overcapacity when the new improvements come online as well because the new improvements don't have provisions to cope with dwell times at the busiest stations (the not-as-busy-but-still-busy stations could see improvement if not for Bloor and King and possibly Union stations).

If Bay were to run a coupled pair of streetcars every two minutes, it could be quite useful to the Yonge line south of Bloor. It will also provide a more door-to-door type service for the Bay St. posse, which is what should make it sustainable.

It's cheap compared to other ways to alleviate Yonge south of Bloor and can enhance the street and "enshrine" in a sense a great piece of symbolism in the city that is somewhat marred in the environment of the day. I think there will be some increased on Bay St., although I agree it would be more weekday-oriented than weekend.

Furthermore, for north-south travel in the core, there is only the subway except for the odd bus route, like Bay or Sherbourne (or the 97B if that counts). This provides a hop-on-hop-off service right on the street, slightly more local (although sometimes still the same spacing as the subway), and no stairs :okay:

I'm sure this can be attractive to many if well-designed (isn't everything? :lol:).

Part of the reason for pushing a pedestrian mall here though is because there is already so little need for Bay St. in this area: no parking spots, no driveways, no garage entrances etc. are on this portion of Bay St., almost no property would be affected in terms of access by this conversion - low risk. I mentioned between Adelaide and King might hold an exception or two, but otherwise, it is ripe for the taking.

It isn't only Bay St. itself that stands to benefit, but the streets it intersects with near their Bay St. crossing as well. :)

It just seems a bit overkill to make it a transit mall to me. If you're planning on having 2 minute frequencies, then that means for MOST of the time, the street will be completely empty. PATH has already killed a lot of pedestrian traffic, and Bay north of Queen isn't exactly full of pedestrians either.

I just don't see the need of having a transit mall when it won't actually make things that much better for transit and make very little difference to the cityscape.

If this were to be built, considering there's no parking on Bay anyway, just make it so that there is a dedicated right of way instead.

I also see no point here. Downtown is already well-served. DRL is more important

It just seems a bit overkill to make it a transit mall to me. If you're planning on having 2 minute frequencies, then that means for MOST of the time, the street will be completely empty. PATH has already killed a lot of pedestrian traffic, and Bay north of Queen isn't exactly full of pedestrians either.

I just don't see the need of having a transit mall when it won't actually make things that much better for transit and make very little difference to the cityscape.

If this were to be built, considering there's no parking on Bay anyway, just make it so that there is a dedicated right of way instead.

Speaking of overkill :ohno: ...

http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w203/TrainX/EW.jpg

^^ Where's the money coming from to finance all these inane streetcar schemes, in addition to funding all of Transit City and future subway extensions into Vaughan, etc? :dunno: It's like we're cramming in proposal after proposal in a vain effort to get all greenlit at once, which only serves to further backlog federal funding for any.

Way to go, brain-trust! :no:

Bay Street north of Queen, truly needs no more than the 6 bus. To the south, it'd be nice to see some of the existing PATH network relinquished to make room for some form of underground transit down to Queens Quay.

... have you seen downtown Toronto?

There's a lot of new condo's

It's like downtown Toronto has just added another city.

The city has become gridlocked - it needs major transit upgrades.

Toronto needs a queen subway and an eglinton subway! Both are badly needed because eglinton is just HORRIBLE during rush hours and queen would add a relief line to downtown and also allow the CBD to move east-west, currently the CBD is situated between the north-south Y-U line

^^Off-topic

I walked up and down Bay St. yesterday, and here's what I am thinking;

South of Union; merged into existing tunnel
South Queen; Transit Mall
South of Dundas; Right-of-Way like Spadina
South of College; "Roncesvalles" style (protruding sidewalk platforms), with as-is tracks used as-is
South of Charles; "Cherry" or "Fleet" style (Right-of-Way shifted to one side of the street).
South of Cumberland; underground (renovate Lower Bay south track to accomodate streetcars, loop single-track back underneath Charles)

This should be capable of mainaining current traffic needs for access where present, deliveries where needed, and emergency vehicles.

(more details later)

Where's the money coming from to finance all these inane streetcar schemes, in addition to funding all of Transit City and future subway extensions into Vaughan, etc? It's like we're cramming in proposal after proposal in a vain effort to get all greenlit at once, which only serves to further backlog federal funding for any.
Mixed streetcars are extremely cheap compared to subways or LRT and could be built within months.

Bay Street north of Queen, truly needs no more than the 6 bus.
There's absolutely NO north-south counterpart to 501 Queen or 504 King. Definitely won't be a waste.

To the south, it'd be nice to see some of the existing PATH network relinquished to make room for some form of underground transit down to Queens Quay.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

After amassing a warchest of photostudy on Bay St. (man, it's total condo-mania), this is what I'm proposing;
LEGEND:
Crimson: Underground
Magenta: Portal/Transition
Yellow: Dedicated ROW in the middle (like Spadina)
Light Blue: Dedicated ROW to one side of the street (like Fleet St., or Cherry St. when it's done)
Light Green: Mixed traffic, but with platforms protruding out from the sidewalk
Orange: The style of the King Street proposal with alternating one-way roads.
Dark Green: Transit Mall - no cars, just pedestrians and streetcars.
Blue: Platform areas
Dark Blue: Sidewalk protrusions for King Street style

Lots was taken into consideration including parking access to buildings and loading/recieving requirements for buildings; there's 2 or 3 areas that may be a bit complicated, but otherwise existing needs have been accounted for in this proposal.

Not shown, but I want to grade-separate Temperance St., part of Albert St., and Walton St., this reduces traffic lights for the LRT and improves pedestrian safety at these locations.

Also not shown are which directions are valid on which parts of Bay St. - in most parts it is obvious but not in all parts.

South of Union Station is existing, and half the Bloor loop is also existing by converting the Lower Bay station's south track to streetcar service with a new single-track tunnel under Charles to complete the loop.

http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w203/TrainX/BayStLRT.jpg

Interesting idea.

But Bay St is between 2 subway lines, and the PATH system. I think most people would just stick with walking to Union, or walking to the subway.

I really do not think a streetcar is needed for that corridor.

A streetcar above Bloor street to Eglinton Avenue would be worthwhile though.

Part of the point is that Yonge is overcapacity south of Bloor; a well-designed LRT could take several thousand ppdph off of Yonge in the peak direction, but also of significant note is that there is a LOT of high-rises throughout the Bay corridor except around City Hall between Dundas and Queen. This means a very high degree of on-street demand that is worth serving with a high-quality transit mode like dedicated streetcar lanes. This would in a lot of cases be a shorter walk to the vehicle for many people because it makes more at-your-door stops and can also provide one-seat services to a variety of places; it could go all the way to the Ex, or along the new Queen's Quay East line, the Bremner line, etc., where the subway isn't available. Also of significant note is that this works towards returning Bay St. to the people from the auto; there's a lot of great retail frontage from Dundas to Wellesley that can benefit from enhanced pedestrian environment; expanded patios, enhanced landscaping, less noise to from traffic to interfere with conversation, etc., it can provide a dramatic transformation for Bay St. and be a great start to balancing downtown's dedicated space distribution between auto and pedestrian, which currently leans far too heavily in the auto's favour. The point isn't to eliminate the auto, but to encourage lively and attractive streetlife.

I am honestly not certain it will relieve congestion on the Yonge Line, especially since it will be a slower streetcar, but I do like the idea of revitalizing, and enhancing Bay Street. Hell the tracks do not actually have to be located in the middle of the street. They can be run adjacent to the sidewalk, similar to the Portland Streetcar. And the construction costs can be very cheap. Portland Streetcar used a quick, and cheap shallow slab construction which works really well for lightweight streetcars.

Thinking about it, Streetcars on Bay can work. I still believe a Streetcar in Yorkville would be great too.

My stance is that it has more to do with convenience than speed. I think most people would rather be brought as close to their destination as possible rather than take a faster route that makes them walk more.

In the cases of, say, Wellesley, sure, the difference between subway and LRT is going to be negligible, I don't dispute that; but if somebody wants, for example, Grosvenor, or Gerrard, that's not right on the subway, and there are a lot of high-rises in these areas, some of which are still under construction, especially around Grosvenor.

However, for the locals, for whom it is difficult to get on the Yonge Line at all at peak, this LRT becomes particularly attractive.

RENOVATED STATIONS:
Bay (Yorkville)
NEW STATIONS:
Charles West
STOPS:
Wellesley West
Grosvenor
College Park*
Gerrard West
Atrium on Bay (Dundas West)*
City Hall (Queen West)*
Temperance
King West (Financial District)
Front West (Union Station)
EXISTING STATIONS:
Queen's Quay (Ferry Docks)

*Dundas West was given a different name to avoid giving anybody the idea they were near the subway station of the same name.

Similar albeit not as necessary applies at College Park.

City Hall was applied as the name at Queen because the stop is sandwiched between both old and new City Hall.



New tunnels are almost exclusively single-track (only Charles West Station is double-tracked, the loop starts immediately north from there), on Bay between St.Mary St. and Cumberland, and beneath Charles St. connecting to the old subway wye from Museum into Bay Lower.

There's a new portal into the existing tunnel south of Union Station, but the idea is that it would fit in to the existing planned renovation of the existing loop there as it expands into new platforms beneath the Teamways on both sides of Bay, dramatically expanding capacity at the station - this Bay LRT would not use that loop though, it is physically impossible.



While you are right that this will do nothing for anybody along Yonge north of Bloor, the explicit target is the locals of the line rather than feeders (except for the Bloor-Danforth line, which is expected to have a notable impact), because even though Bay is already majorly built up, it's still under construction. When all the construction is done, the only mildly sparse areas are going to be on the west side of Bay south of Wellesley where Queen's Park spill over to with its Parliamentary flair in landscaping - which is good, I like it, but north of Edward, the density is going to be sick when all is done (including some projects that haven't really started yet).

I'm going to provide a more detailed look at the actual density and compare it to Yonge St. south of Bloor in the future. Stay tuned, while I'm not exactly sure what the results will be, I expect them to be facinating in their own right.

It is an elegant solution to a generally unrecognized problem.