Updated June 9, 2010 at 7:40 pm:
Council today voted to support the TTC’s proposal for the Ashbridge Carhouse including an access route via Leslie Street. This was little surprise given that Councillors are loathe to override staff recommendations unless there is an overwhelming case in favour of an alternative.
The first part of the debate turned on whether the carhouse should be at the Ashbridge site at all. Despite some uninformed grandstanding by would-be mayor Ford, and handwringing by others over what might have been at the Lever site (Sunlight Park) if only its availability had been known sooner in the process, the Ashbridge site selection was approved.
The second part of the debate focussed on the access route. The TTC argued strongly against the Knox/Russell option and that position won the day, in part because few champions of this route rose in the debate.
The Transit Project Assessment now enters its formal 90-day phase for comment and then goes to the Minister of the Environment for approval.
Updated June 7, 2010 at 6:40 pm:
As requested by the Commission, TTC staff have commented to Council for its June 8/9, 2010 meeting on the proposed Russell/Knox route from Queen Street to Ashbridge Carhouse. This report appears to take as uncompromising a line as possible on the alternative to a Leslie Street access route.
[Sorry to new readers. The information in this update presumes a knowledge of the details, for which you should read the main post following.]
I believe that the TTC has overplayed their hand here, and given yet another example of their unwillingness to fairly evaluate alternatives to their own proposals. This stance has effects beyond the immediate project, and adds to the general distrust of material the TTC places before elected bodies. The comments below should be read in concert with the TTC report. The subtitles below correspond to the sections of that report.
Background:
The TTC states that it evaluated 11 routes to the new carhouse. However, no detailed evaluation of the “Russell/Knox” route was included in the Transit Project Assessment. It appears here only as a short letter, and only by virtue of the Commission’s direction, not staff’s initiative.
Loss of LRV Storage Space:
At a meeting between Councillor Fletcher, Chair Giambrone, TTC staff and other interested parties (including me) on May 28, there was no mention of a permanent facility for collision repair at Russell Carhouse. When we challenged the long-term need for the “prototype testing facility” at Russell, there was no reply indicating its eventual function, one which appears to have developed in the interim.
Why was a collision repair facility not included in the Ashbridge site as this building will take over the major maintenance function for streetcars now performed at Hillcrest Shops?
The TTC refers to their master plan for LRV Maintenance, and should be required to publish it. All neighbours of TTC streetcar facilities need to know what is planned for these sites. This entire discussion could have been conducted on a better-informed basis if this material were already in public hands.
What is the future use of space inside Russell and Roncesvalles carhouse buildings? From the Russell plans shown by the TTC, they only count the outdoor storage as “capacity”.
One question for City budget watchdogs: is the construction of this facility included within the Capital Budget item for the Ashbridge Carhouse, or is this a net new expenditure? Is this another example of TTC project creep?
Property Required on Queen Street:
The TTC claims that it must take in full the property on Queen Street just west of the existing exit from the yard. If one considers the east to south curve required for the new connection as following the same trajectory as the existing track, it would not foul the building. The TTC should be required to show a detailed plan of why a full taking of this property is required.
This view is from Google Earth, and it clearly shows the exit at the west end of the yard, the three yard tracks that would be taken for the Knox route, and the location of the building in question relative to these tracks.
This view is from Google Street View and shows a car leaving the yard westbound onto Queen Street. The tracks which permit this operation will not be available to new LRVs in the future carhouse operations, and all LRVs will have to use the eastern exits from the carhouse.
This view shows the western exit from Russell Yard.
This view looks directly south at the western property line of Russell Yard and shows how the existing tracks relate to the property next door. It strains credibility that with a slight shift to the east of this junction, a 90 degree turn east to south cannot be installed without requiring taking of the neighbouring property.
Inefficient Operations:
The TTC claims that two extra traffic signals will unduly slow operations, but their own evaluation of a route via Connaught, Eastern and Knox to the north side of the Ashbridge site claimed that only 1 minute would be added to the trip. Proper signal priority should be capable of moving streetcars through the curves to and from Eastern Avenue in reasonable time.
Moreover, the TTC does not consider the delay some of its cars travelling on Leslie will encounter. About 40% of all moves to and from Ashbridge Carhouse will occur other than during the wee hours of the night.
Circulation around the Ashbridge site is a legitimate concern, but it was not raised in the TTC’s evaluation of their own scheme to enter the site from the north.
Canada Post:
The TTC claims that Canada Post will oppose any use of Eastern and Knox for carhouse access. However, there has been no traffic analysis to substantiate this objection and, moreover, the representative from Canada Post at the recent TTC meeting was clearly confused about which end of his site actually was used by trailer units. In fact it is the eastern end (Woodfield Avenue) where the trailer bays are located, not at Knox.
At a minimum, the TTC needs to validate claims of traffic interference and confirm which of Canada Post’s operations, if any, would actually be affected.
I must ask how TTC streetcar movements on Eastern and Knox would so disrupt Canada Post and yet not have comparable effects a block away on Leslie Street for general users of that street.
Martin Goodman Trail:
The TTC claims that the Martin Goodman Trail, a cycling road on the south side of Lake Shore, would be forced to cross streetcar tracks curving into the new carhouse site. This would be unsafe as bicycles don’t do well with streetcar tracks that are not crossed at 90 degrees (as they would be for the Leslie alignment).
First off, it is odd that the TTC has now discovered the safety problems inherent in streetcar tracks and cycling, but does not address the issue of shared use of roadspace on Leslie Street.
Second, the location on Lake Shore where the Knox trackage would cross is one where there is a median that disappears to the east. If the eastbound lanes of Lake Shore were to swing north to the west of Knox rather than further east as at present, there would be plenty of room for the Martin Goodman trail to cross the tracks before they begin to curve into the TTC site.
The report of TTC actions at the June 2 Commission meeting and the original post on this topic follow the break below.
June 2 TTC Meeting Update
On June 2, the TTC considered the matter of Ashbridge Carhouse including the site, possible routes to the carhouse and the associated Transit Project Assessment Report.
The matter has been passed on to the Toronto Council meeting of June 8 with the staff recommendation intact, but with additional motions placed by Commissioner Bussin on behalf of Councillor Fletcher (who does not sit on the Commission):
- To consider the addition of a second access route for the Ashbridges Bay MSF and to report to City Council on the Knox/Russell/Eastern route.
- To meet with stakeholders to ensure appropriate mitigation for the Leslie Street route.
- To direct staff to report back on changes proposed to the Russell Streetcar Facility to accommodate the new LRVs and to consult with the public on the impacts and mitigation measures of the changes.
- To ensure design excellence for the site and also the route; and to include a greening strategy on Leslie Street to Queen.
- To establish a construction liaison committee for the site and the route.
Many local residents spoke to this issue at the meeting, and their positions can be broken roughly into three groups:
- Those who oppose the site entirely.
- Those who accept the site as a future carhouse and maintenance shops, but who object to the use of Leslie Street as the access from Queen Street.
- Those supporting an alternative route from Queen that was not included in the TPA Report. This is the route through Russell Yard proposed by me (see below for details).
This has been a contentious matter for some time, and many residents spoke with a sense of frustration at having their concerns downplayed or ignored by project staff. For its part, the TTC regards the project as urgent so that the new facility will be ready in time for delivery of the first of the LFLRVs in 2013.
During discussion of the Russell Yard proposal and other matters, it was clear that there is some reluctance to overrule staff, particularly at this late stage in the process, and that some of the detailed issues are not well understood by Commissioners, many of whose wards are nowhere near the Russell or Ashbridge sites. Councillor Fletcher and Commissioner Bussin’s wards meet on Leslie Street, and they share a direct interest in whatever is decided here.
I will not reiterate my arguments here as they are summarized in my deputation.
A representative appeared for Canada Post Corporation because their South Central facility, the largest of their plants in Canada, lies in the large block bounded by Eastern Avenue on the north, Woodfield Road on the east, and Knox Avenue on the west. They expressed concern that streetcar operations on Knox would interfere with truck movements in and out of their plant, and especially were concerned about trailer operations. However, the Canada Post rep seemed to get his directions askew when talking about their trailer yard which is at the east (Woodfield) end of the building.
This is not the end of the Canada Post site where streetcars would run. Instead, they would run via Knox Avenue at the other end of the building. In response to claims that there was a great deal of traffic on this street at the same time as the TTC’s morning service buildup from 0600 to 0700, I stood at that location for an hour this morning to record what actually happened. There were some Canada Post trucks at Knox, but hardly a flood, and many that came along Eastern Avenue used the Woodfield Road entrance. You can read the details in my log.
The primary source of traffic on Knox is postal employees arriving and leaving work as there is a shift change at 0700.
One of the local residents, speaking of the wildlife nearby, noted that a beaver had been sighted crossing Leslie Street from the Tim Horton’s to Loblaw’s. This is clearly an urban beaver. In keeping with this holistic view of the neighbourhood, and because an hour of watching for a mythical traffic jam of postal trucks gets boring, I included notes about some other passersby.
It is unclear whether the representative from Canada Post was properly briefed before he made his presentation, but my opinion is that he spoke to a proposal that was not, in fact, on the table.
When TTC staff report on the Russell Yard option to Council next week, we will see how they characterize the Post Office traffic. Notably, when they had their own Knox option in the TPA, they did not mention this as a possible impediment.
The original version of this post follows here:
On June 2, 2010, the TTC will consider the Transit Project Assessment Study for a proposed new carhouse and shops near Ashbridge’s Bay at the southeast corner of Lake Shore Blvd. E. and Leslie Street. This project has gone through much debate and public consultation.
One remaining issue is expected to generate debate at the TTC meeting. The proposed route from Queen Street to the carhouse is the most direct going straight south via Leslie to the site, but this has triggered concerns in the area. In brief, these are:
- Leslie from Queen to Eastern (one block south) is largely a residential street and a large number of streetcar movements to and from the carhouse will occur overnight.
- A new “T” junction will be created at Queen Street where there is a Seniors’ residence on the northeast corner. This will be a source of noise not just from cars turning, but from all-day service through the intersection. This effect was not addressed in the Transit Project Assessment.
- Leslie is a major cycling route to the waterfront. Addition of streetcar tracks creates a constraint for cyclists using the road where none exists today.
When the TTC studied alternative routes to the carhouse, one option they proposed ran via Connaught (the east end of the existing Russell Carhouse), Eastern (the south side of the Russell site) and Knox Avenue to reach the new carhouse.
However, they did not examine the creation of a new streetcar-only link through the west end of Russell Yard as an alternative to new double track on Connaught. Such an arrangement has the following benefits:
- Elimination of the need to widen the south end of Connaught where only a single southbound track now exists.
- Isolation of traffic bound to and from the new carhouse from operations at Russell Yard and Connaught Avenue.
- Provision of a shorter route from Queen to the new carhouse than either the Leslie Street or the TTC’s Connaught options.
The major offsetting issue is that this would take space from Russell Yard that reduces the overall system capacity to store streetcars in the future.
Another possible route studied by the TTC was to connect via Coxwell and Lake Shore. Although this link could be improved by comparison with the version the TTC proposed, it still has significant problems notably the heavy use of Coxwell by cyclists to reach the waterfront, and severe traffic congestion during special events in the area.
As a backgrounder to this discussion, I prepared an article detailing the issues with each of the options.
Illustrated commentary on alternative routes
TTC Staff are expected to support their preferred Leslie Street route to the carhouse at the June 2 meeting. How the Commission responds remains to be seen.
There is some irony in the fact that the City’s Executive Committee recently overruled a TTC recommendation regarding the proposed link between the Sheppard East LRT and the Scarborough RT/LRT. Staff proposed an on-street link via Progress to Sheppard over which fewer than 20 SRT trains would have operated daily. The Executive Committee directed that an underground connect be used, at an estimated cost of about $65-million, to spare effects on residents and a cultural centre on Progress Avenue.
There is a direct analogy between the two situations, and the amount of streetcar/LRV traffic proposed for Leslie Street is much greater than for Progress Avenue.
At the TTC, there is a strong desire to have this issue settled so that the project can be forwarded to Council for approval before the summer break and the inevitable hiatus in work during the fall election.
Updated June 1, 2010:
The map above shows the routes under discussion:
Blue: TTC proposed Leslie Street route
Green: TTC Connaught Avenue option
Red: Russell Yard option
The purple lines show the carhouse site.
This map shows details of the Russell Carhouse site.
Blue box: The area to be repurposed as a northsouth route through the west end of the carhouse property.
Red box: The existing junction between the yard and Queen Street at Vancouver which must be restructured to link with the new tracks. The new intersection here would match what is proposed for Queen & Leslie by the TTC.
Orange lines: The Russell/Knox route including access to Queen both ways.
Green box: The space intended initially as a prototype testing facility which will later be available for LRV storage.
Steve Munro 
Hi Steve:
Here is a thought, most of the streetcars coming out of Russell are east/west routes. For the sake of cars coming on the 501, 502, 503, 504, 505 from their westerly locations, how about they use Broadview, Sunrise, Eastern to Leslie. All eastbound cars could use Leslie or Coxwell and off to their easterly locations. This could ease pressure off Leslie and ease pressure from concerned residents in the area.
Steve: That’s a rather long carhouse access track just to get cars off of Leslie Street.
LikeLike
The TTC report continues their long-running error regarding the construction of Roncesvalles CH by claiming the carhouse building was built in 1895. It was constructed in 1923 and incorporated none of the old structure. The original building on the west side of Roncesvalles Av north of Queen WAS built in 1895, but it was completely demolished when the new building was opened and part of the property sold. Interesting that they managed to get Russell’s construction year correct, rather than claiming the date of 1911 for the old TRC paint shop on the same site.
LikeLike
A couple of Questions? (Not that I am asking you to explain TTC decision(?) making.
1. Why does the Coxwell route enter the car house from Leslie instead of the north east especially since the Ashbridge – Connaught route does?
Steve: Because they designed it that way. As you will see in my linked article, I would use a northeast entrance, and would use side-of-the-road running on Lake Shore from Coxwell to the carhouse.
2. Could the west access track through Connaught not be bi – directional? How often do they run cars in and out of service at the same time? If they needed to they could use Connaught for the southbound move.
Steve: The idea is to create no operational barrier nor any requirement for signalling. Do you remember the Rube Goldberg setup at Humber Loop for single track operation of the Long Branch car? Also, going down Connaught (a) annoys the neighbours and (b) requires a more complex connection to the ladder track at the west end of the yard. Finally, if the TTC ever wanted to replace Russell Yard, they could keep their right-of-way at the west end and redevelop the rest.
3. When is the track on Connaught and Eastern due for rebuild? Would this not make car house access difficult during construction? They might need to have Ashbridge ready to store cars while they do a major rebuild of Russell.
Steve: This was originally scheduled for this year. See my post on track plans. No, I don’t know how they will get cars into the carhouse while they replace the track on Connaught. Presumably they will be somewhat quicker about it than with other track projects.
4. Have they considered an underground connection surfacing in the middle of the trailer tracks at the north end of Russell? Surely this would solve everyone’s problems for only a slight increase in cost.
Steve: I assume you are joking. There is the small matter of the portal and ramp structure at each end.
LikeLike
Is the concern about streetcar noise on Leslie Street exaggerated? There are frequent streetcars on residential streets such as Howard Park Drive and upper Gerard Street among others. What is different on Leslie?
Steve: At Queen Street, there will be an intersection across which streetcars will move at all hours, and there is a seniors’ residence right on the corner. The frequency of operations will be considerably higher than on Howard Park which has no scheduled service between 1 and 5 am. There is no special work on Howard Park west of Roncesvalles, or anywhere on Upper Gerrard.
The issue is that Leslie will be used for carhouse moves which are very active overnight as the service runs in at the end of operations (the last Spadina car gets to Russell Carhouse around 3 am), and out again for the start of day service. There will be about 80 cars going up Leslie in a two hour period at the start of service. No residential street (other than Connaught at Russell Carhouse) has this kind of activity.
LikeLike
It’s not fair to the senior citizens, but the TTC will choose Leslie for what are really very logical reasons from their perspective.
I doubt that the TTC and/or the City truly intend to retain Russell Carhouse post-fleet transition. I also expect that, through one miracle or another, all of the Flexity cars will be delivered well-ahead of schedule. Not that such a scenario won’t create headaches for the TTC, it will just be a different set of headaches. I’m sure that a new western carhouse on the CNE grounds with a service track up Dufferin will be suggested in due course, just to prime everybody for the debate on how to best replace Roncevalles in short order.
I like Coxwell via Lake Shore as an alignment, but I don’t expect the TTC to do it unless they can create a reasonable route that includes most of the new trackage and some pre-existing trackage. To the north, it would likely mean taking over, and partly redirecting, the 22/A Coxwell route, but the ridership isn’t high enough to warrant it. To the south, there really won’t be enough demand until the port lands are redeveloped, and that’s a long way off.
In the meantime, the owners of the seniors’ residence will likely sell the property for redevelopment within the next three years and displace their seniors to one of their other properties or to their competition. The morbid aspect of any seniors’ home is that you can retire a building fairly easily if you don’t turnover the rooms.
LikeLike
Steve: I assume you are joking. There is the small matter of the portal and ramp structure at each end.
Yes but it seems a typical TTC method to solve a simple problem.
LikeLike
Steve,
Thank you SO much for writing both of these articles! You’ve obviously put a great deal of work into them – very much appreciated.
And thank you for pointing out the impact on cyclists which I had neglected to mention in my previous rants on your LRV design page.
As you can see from your visit to the area, all of the parkland in the area, and both of the streets leading to Ashbridges Bay (Coxwell) and the Leslie Street spit (Leslie), are heavily used during the summer by cyclists, pedestrians, and vehicular traffic. It’s important to mention that a great deal of this traffic is non-local; this area is a significant tourist destination for both people from the GTA and non-Ontario tourists to Toronto (who frequently get lost on the 501 – and always negatively comment on how long it takes, btw).
In addition, during weekdays year round Lakeshore, Eastern, Queen, and the N/S streets in this area are heavily used by local and Scarborough commuters – both vehicle and cyclists.
ALL of the above will be negatively impacted by the extremely poor siting of this facility.
And to add insult to injury service east of here, which has a history of being notoriously poor, WILL SEE NO IMPROVEMENT thanks to this facility – only degradation.
One important detail (not a detail for those of us in the east end mind you): this site hasn’t actually been approved yet, and in (what appear to be sham) meetings with the community it is still listed as ONE of SIX options. However, you can clearly see from the dialogue around it that consideration of the other options is just window dressing.
This is extremely unfortunate, because four of the other options are in industrial areas NEXT DOOR which are MUCH better suited for an installation of this type. It seems the TTC doesn’t seem to consider that quality of life for neighbourhoods, tourist areas, or commuters is important enough to factor into their comparison scenarios.
For more background on the “sham” community consultation meetings you can read this article on insidetoronto.
Steve: Note that I only link to articles on other sites. Copyright conventions allow me to selectively quote from them, but not to reproduce the articles, even after it is no longer available.
Once again, thank you so much for covering this issue.
LikeLike
What is wrong with the current carhouses, in the sense of why does the TTC need a new carhouse when they already have three carhouses (Hillcrest, Roncesvalles, and Russell)?
Steve: The new and old fleets will co-exist for some time, and there is little additional room at the old carhouses. Hillcrest is not a carhouse at all. It is a main shops whose facilities are not suited to cars with their equipment on the roof. Also, with the new cars being the equivalent of two LRVs long, the number of vehicles that will fit on existing carhouse tracks is constrained. For example, at the south end of Russell carhouse, there isn’t enough room for a new car to sit outside of the shed waiting to get in without blocking the ladder track on Eastern Ave. In general, for larger cars, the TTC needs long thin yards.
LikeLike
Yes, but with the total number of CLRV and ALRV fleet versus the new fleet, there will be less cars in the long run, and with some cars being operated at all times (especially the 501/301), the TTC does not require a space for every single car. I personally still do not see why the TTC MUST have three carhouses (sorry, I forgot that Hillcrest did not have storage space.) Roncesvalles and Russell should be able to handle a lot of the work.
Steve: The same problem about roof access applies to the old carhouses as to Hillcrest. Moreover, if the old carhouses get a major upgrade, they haveto be brought up to current building code. We need a third carhouse.
LikeLike
TorontoStreetcars writes: “What is wrong with the current carhouses, in the sense of why does the TTC need a new carhouse when they already have three carhouses (Hillcrest, Roncesvalles, and Russell)?”
With the new streetcars being low floor, the entire maintenance regimen will have to change. With old streetcars, the electrical works were underneath the car, and these had to be accessed through the use of pits, which you see at Russell and, I believe, Roncesvalles. The low floor cars have their electrics in the ceiling, meaning that pits are not as effective, so either new facilities have to be built, or the old facilities need to be rebuilt. With the proposed new facility in the Portlands, they have state-of-the-art facilities to deal with the new streetcars.
Also, the TTC has long considered consolidating its two streetcar barns into one. I believe they even considered building a new carhouse to replace the two old ones at the old Molson Brewery lands (such a project would have pushed forward a connection between Exhibition Loop and Dufferin Loop so that an accident on Bathurst or Fleet wouldn’t isolate the carhouse from the system.
LikeLike
There is no real pedestrian volume at Leslie and Commissioners, the actual location of the new yard. It is a complete myth that there is a “large” cyclist volume anywhere on Leslie south of Queen at any time of the year, even on Canada Day with 25° weather. Even if both those were true, stating them is not the same as stating that nothing could possibly be resolved for pedestrians and cyclists.
Anyone who’s actually honest about the traffic at Leslie and Commissioners would use exactly one word for it: “Trucks.”
Entitled arriviste Leslieville homeowners are afraid of only two things in their lives: A single molecule of bisphenol A entering their babies’ bloodstreams and a streetcar carhouse miles away from where they live. In both cases their fears are hyperbolic and irrational.
Steve: That’s odd. I was there photographing on Victoria Day morning, and the cycling traffic was quite heavy and sustained.
LikeLike
My opinion would be to rebuild the two carhouses. Why go through the process of upsetting local residents in the Jarvis area when you have two locations that have been carhouses for a long time. Either option (rebuild vs. new) would cost money, and the new site has the advantage of having everything condensed into one location but I just do not personally see why the TTC needs to go through all the hassle when they already have locations in operation.
And let’s not forget that in the link to Steve’s earlier post that the TTC plan for construction includes Roncesvalles yard receiving track work in 2012. Why put any money into a carhouse that they do not want? Do that work and you may as well go all the way and fix the carhouse and keep it in operation. At least that my two cents.
Steve: Jarvis??
The problem with just rebuilding existing carhouses is that (a) a replacement for Hillcrest as a maintenance shops is needed and (b) there will be too many cars on the property to fit at the existing sites both during and after the transition. Don’t forget that the new fleet represents the equivalent of over 400 CLRVs while the current fleet is the equivalent of about 270.
LikeLike
Steve said: That’s odd. I was there photographing on Victoria Day morning, and the cycling traffic ([at Leslie and Commissioners] was quite heavy and sustained.
Leslie Street south of Lakeshore is certainly an increasingly cycled area, it is part of the major east-west route along the Lake and is the gateway to the Leslie Street Spit (aka Tommy Thompson Park). Waterfront Toronto and the City have made a good cycle path from Lakeshore south to Commissioners (on the east side of Leslie) and are busily – well slowly! – extending this to Unwin Street and the entrance to the Spit. There were quite a few cyclists on it yesterday, as there are most weekends.
LikeLike
Steve, I have to say that I really like your idea of having the TTC use the western edge of Russell Carhouse for their link to Eastern Avenue. What could the TTC possibly have against that?
LikeLike
Steve, I seem to recall some chat about the feasibility/desirability creating a division at Hillcrest to handle 511, 512 etc. when heavy maintenance moved to Lakeshore – or was that post-CLRV/ALRV retirement?
Steve: Not sure. Another issue is that the Metrolinx decision to make the Transit City lines standard gauge means that operation of the 512 cannot be shifted to Black Creek carhouse (via Jane) to free up space at one of the “downtown” carhouses for fleet expansion in the future. This threw off the TTC’s capacity calculations.
LikeLike
@Joe Clark 4:18 p.m.
Your argument about traffic volume at Leslie and Commissioners holds water… but only if the TTC has found a way to teleport the LRVs from their routes to the yard. Unfortunately the 100 foot long behemoths need to wend their way to/from their routes of origin and the storage facility. So the relevant traffic patterns to be considered are everything between their home routes and the yard.
I don’t live in the Leslieville area, but I travel through it – sometimes daily. Recreationally I use both Ashbridges Bay and the Leslie St. Spit frequently, as do a large number of our friends. I think it should be protected for everyone who uses it – which is a very considerable number of people.
LikeLike
Steve, I have to say that I really like your idea of having the TTC use the western edge of Russell Carhouse for their link to Eastern Avenue. What could the TTC possibly have against that?
Just one thing. They didn’t think of it! Besides, why do something simple and low-cost when you can spend a fortune inc. hiring staff and consultants.
LikeLike
I think there are several points that need to be considered that I haven’t yet seen discussed in depth:
1) the absolutely unnecessary loss of park/greenspace when ALL alternate sites are on industrial land.
2) access routes which unnecessarily cut through neighbourhoods and major transportation routes (vehicular, cycle, and transit) when alternates exist through industrial areas.
3) the (unprecedented?) volume of streetcars which will be stored at the facility and travelling through the community.
Item #1: To get a feel for what we’re talking about I would suggest taking a look at the site options and then look at the area via google maps satellite (search for Basin St. Toronto).
What becomes immediately apparent is the amount of parkland/greenspace that will be obliterated to site the facility here, and the insanity of that decision when you see that the nearby sites are all on grey industrial land.
Item #2: If you follow google maps to the OTHER end of Commissioners St. you’ll notice that there are two possible alternate routes: the Don Roadway or Cherry St, both of which run entirely through industrial areas. It seems to me that the option that doesn’t impact residential areas should be given more weight here. In addition, both streets are closer to downtown, which reduces the requirement to run non-Queen streetcars on overly-congested Queen St. There are more arguments describing how this could work in the doc from the community “consultation” meeting.
Item #3: We are talking about well over 200 streetcar trips per day to/from this facility (Steve – would you have a number estimate?). When you factor in that each of these cars is double the length of current cars, I don’t know that anyone has really gauged just how disruptive that would be to, for instance: rush hour traffic on Lakeshore/Queen/Eastern; the 501/502/etc., streetcars; the 143 Express bus; bicycle traffic on the bike paths, etc… That is a volume of streetcar traffic that I would imagine is unprecedented, and I don’t think has an equivalent anywhere else in the city – even on Queen St/Russell yard. Not to mention the residents that live nearby…
Steve: According to the TTC’s estimate (see page 35 of the April 8 presentation), there will be about 230 moves per day to and from the carhouse. They are concentrated in times outside of the peak periods, with about 3/4 of them between 7pm and 7am.
Note that we spent millions to take down the Gardiner East of the DVP so that we could reinvigorate local neighbourhoods and help renew the waterfront. All with the assurance that commute times wouldn’t be significantly impacted. I don’t think they factored in 200+ streetcar trips across Lakeshore in that equation. Of course, since then that area has received a gas plant, a Canadian Tire complex, just missed a Walmart, and is about to get this thing. Sigh… DVP commuters take note: this is what will happen to you when they try to take down the Gardiner at the base of the DVP. They’ll promise that your commute won’t be impacted – much. Better be sure to get a L-O-O-O-O-N-G warranty period on that promise.
Of course, if this site gets approved as is, we could always look at putting the Gardiner back up again. La plus ca change…
LikeLike
How much more is the standard guage decision going to cost us in the long run? It is ridicuous that this is at least in part causing expensive property developments and alterations on the ‘independent’ legacy system!
I find it hard to believe that with all the space at Hillcrest, especially once they stop rebuilding ‘antique’ buses and first-gen LRVs, that there can’t be a decent-sized operating division assembled there.
LikeLike
A presumably historical question I’ve been wondering about for some time: What is the purpose/history of the northbound track on Connaught from the point where it splits off the southbound track up to where the track comes out of the yard? I note that even now it has overhead even though the only way onto it would be by backing up. With the exception of this one track the entire yard is entirely oriented, that is, there is a definite direction to every track consistent with the on-street operations.
Similar question for the easternmost of the three (yes, three) tracks formerly present at loop at Kingston Rd & Queen St (It seems to be a remnant now, but when I was there around 10 years ago it still had overhead).
Thanks for any information anybody has.
Steve: The track layour in Russell Yard used to be different and there was a crossover linking the westbound trailer yard track with the eastbound one just at the east gate. This was removed when the yard was reconfigured for MU PCC operation in the late 60s. Once upon a time, the TTC owned double-ended cars and the crossovers may have been used to swap their orientation. Also, there was a time when you could see PCCs facing south into the carhouse with the front truck over the wheel grinder at the north end of the pit.
The tail track at Woodbine was simply for extra storage. In the old days when Greenwood Racetrack (the original “Woodbine”) was busy, there would be a huge surge of crowds out of the track at the end of a day’s races, and the TTC would pour service out of Woodbine Loop to handle this.
LikeLike
@Anne:
The parkland being replaced is not very nice. All the topsoil has to be removed and disposed of during construction because it’s contaminated from a prior industrial use.
LikeLike
Jason said: “I like Coxwell via Lake Shore as an alignment, but I don’t expect the TTC to do it unless they can create a reasonable route that includes most of the new trackage and some pre-existing trackage.”
Honestly, with the traffic down to the beaches during the summer months and the short turn issues that the 506 has, I’d be surprised if the TTC doesn’t consider a Main Station – Ashbridge’s Bay streetcar if they were to go with the Coxwell via Lake Shore alignment.
LikeLike
Ray Kennedy said:
I like the idea, too; however, there is another possible reason for the TTC not liking it.
Steve has suggested that they might be considering replacing Russell in the long run. If that is the case, having two heavily used tracks on the side of the yard away from the street would probably make the property much less desirable to potential buyers.
Steve: However, it would in effect be a private street at the west end of the site. Easy to develop the land with parking over there and housing further east.
LikeLike
Here is another thought about the old Lever Bros. site. Could the existing building be used to house TTC staff rather than a expensive new building at York Mills a site far more suitable for commercial leasing. It would preserve a historic building (which gains them Brownie points) and concentrate facilities on one site.
LikeLike
Just read in 24H Toronto that the TTC agreed to “provide city council with additional information on an possible alternaitive route along Knox Ave.” How can that make any sense; Knox Avenue is even narrower then Leslie Street?
This is one heck of a mess, that’s for sure. That’s like jumping from the frying pan into the fire; nothing will be gained except shifting the problem from Leslie Street to very upset residents on Knox Ave. .
Steve: The piece of Knox in question is between Eastern and Lake Shore where it is bounded on the east by the Canada Post site and on the west by the Fire Academy. The route gets from Eastern to Queen via the west end of Russell Yard as has been described on this site in some detail.
Unfortunately, Leslie Street may be the only and most cost effective route to and from the LRV Yards at Ashbridges Bay but let’s hope that the next time the TTC builds an LRV Yard, they figure out how to get to the yard in the first place eh.
LikeLike
Is there any reason why on street routes are the only ones being considered? Looking at the satellite and street views from Google Maps, it looks like it would be possible to thread a route south through the parking lot just east of Queen/Hastings, along the side of the parkette (contentious, I know, but could be workable), through the junk yard and then along the property line behind the Loblaws and finally out across Lakeshore at its own crossing. The folks at the town homes across from the parkette might not love this option, but, it would be better than disrupting a whole street. I know property acquisition costs would be high, but thought it was an interesting thought none the less.
Steve: The route I have proposed through Russell Yard, then via Eastern and Knox, uses existing TTC property for part of the link, and streets with far fewer residents for hte remainder. The option you suggest also requires a crossing of Lake Shore very close to Leslie with likely problems for traffic operations at that location.
LikeLike
Re: Urban beavers (without stooping to base humor): I believe they are known as groundhogs. Sometimes public input can be so amusing. And if a Canada Post employee can’t figure out east from west, that explains why some of my mail goes missing.
Steve: It’s entirely possible that it was a beaver — our urban critters get around, and what could be more Canajun eh? than stopping by Tim’s?
LikeLike
The whole plan should be scrapped, for the following reasons:
– those low flying geese you observed could get caught in the streetcar overhead
– the cat you observed could screech like a streetcar, triggering a false complaint about rail noise
As for the beaver, are they sure it wasn’t Wally? Heck Beav …
LikeLike
Anne, the “greenspace” you suddenly defend, no doubt without ever having used it even once in your life, is completely uninhabited by human beings by virtue of being located in the middle of nowhere alongside a sewage-treatment plant.
Steve: Whether Anne has used the space herself or not (a claim you cannot prove one way or the other), her concern is that attractive open space will be lost. That’s a valid concern whether it wins out in balance against other issues or not.
LikeLike
What’s really crazy about the whole process is this. They picked a spot but really had not figured out how it would work (routes) and the impact on the area (pretty much torch any business at Queen and Leslie except the Duke!).
It’s the backwards planning that makes things crazy.
Steve: What is particularly galling is that they considered only the noise impacts of streetcars travelling north-south on Leslie to the loop, not the noise generated by the east-west traffic over the new intersection at Queen. The owners of the seniors’ home on the northeast corner have, I understand, registered their displeasure, but this is not mentioned in any TTC report.
Now that they have picked a route, the TTC and their supporting cast of city planners seem bent on proving that it is the best choice even though the route through the yard does not even appear in the Transit Project Assessment and did not receive the same level of scrutiny as other options. They claim it is simply a “modified” version of their own “Connaught” route even though it is specifically designed to avoid the most contentious parts of that option.
LikeLike
I have a hard time believing a beaver would make it all the way from Lake Ontario, in which there is no place along the beach to build a dam, or even along the Spit, and make it all the way to the Loblaws parking lot. I don’t even think they are native to those parts, whereas I have seen groundhogs in Toronto (they are everywhere here in Ottawa, along with rabbits, and they are ruining my flower beds, damned an….er ahem, back to topic). Still, if memory serves me correct, did the TTC not use one of these cute rodents as a children’s-friendly safety mascot?
Steve: Yes, it was probably a groundhog (I have seen a few in broad daylight near my home which is close to the Don Valley), but the story with the beaver just has too good a ring to it. The groundhog only counts on February 2!
LikeLike
@ Joe Clarke Jun 4 4:46 p.m.
Interesting. Tommy Thompson Park is ALSO “completely uninhabited by human beings […] being located in the middle of nowhere alongside a sewage-treatment plant. And it too is built on landfill. By your logic perhaps we should raze it to make the LRV yard employee parking lot?
I’m just wondering what your personal philosophy is. Sorry to be so snarky, but have you ever seen an application to destroy a tree or pave a greenspace you DIDN’T like?
LikeLike
Will the noise really be all that terrible? anyone living next to Roncesvalles carhouse hears constant moving of cars all day long – especially with king short turniung… its not all that bad…
AND….
moving everything into one house is basically how the feeling is now….
with Roncy ripped up… and King about to be ripped up… all the TTC has is Queen to move ever single car into and out of the Roncy house…
is there no extra storage space at russell OR hillcrest that can house cars? Queen is a disaster as it is…now they have 3 times the number of streetcars during the rush hour….
did the TTC really think that ripping up King and Roncesvalles at the same time was a good idea?!
Steve: We are still suffering the effects of the municipal strike last year. The projects should have started sooner, but the folks who do the design work for the contracts were on strike last summer, and this pushed everything back. Now there’s a big rush to complete work this year while federal stimulus funding is available.
LikeLike
Joe Clark says:
“Entitled arriviste Leslieville homeowners are afraid of only two things in their lives: A single molecule of bisphenol A entering their babies’ bloodstreams and a streetcar carhouse miles away from where they live. In both cases their fears are hyperbolic and irrational.”
Anyone who thinks that people who live along Leslie Street between Mosely and Queen — or on any of the streets south of Queen near Leslie — are “entitled” hasn’t been paying too much attention.
Except, possibly, for the residents of the townhouse complex at Eastern and Leslie, I suspect few of them are “arrivistes”, either, since many of my neighbours south of Queen have been living there for the 20 years that I’ve been living north of it.
These are the people who, back in 1990, endured a whole year of having their front and back yards dug up to remove all the lead that Canada Metals left behind. That’s why, if they have good memories, they also have good reason to get upset about “a single molecule of bisphenol A entering their babies’ bloodstreams”… they’ve been down this road before.
LikeLike
No need to post this comment, Steve… But can you make the “The original version of this post follows here:” line in a font size bigger, and maybe bold? For someone catching up, it takes some time to find the break between the original post and the update(s).
Steve: Done! I will adopt this style change in future updates.
LikeLike
I find it ironic that the owners of the retirement home have “registered their displeasure” when the whine of their massive rooftop air conditioner has added a level of white noise to the neighbourhood that is constant all summer long. I’m not kidding. It almost never turns off. That is why in addition to their being on the corner away from the turns, I believe they will barely notice the streetcars noise, which, by the way, is reputed to be less than existing cars.
Steve: The issue is less with the turning cars, although there is some concern for that, than with the ongoing noise of service running through a new streetcar junction. The most recently-built intersections (see Queen and Church) are a big improvement, but they have to stay in that condition for a few decades.
LikeLike
The TTC needs to stop acting like a spoiled, entitled child, and seriously study proposals for access it deems not worthy for their consideration. Time and time again, they opposed ideas only to have their mistakes in dismissing their ideas explode in their faces.
It seems, especially with the Leslie St. issue, that the TTC is looking only at short-term cost savings, rather than long-term planning that fits in with an evolving neighbourhood development.
I cannot for the life of me see the problem of using Connaught’s west side as an access point to the new facility beyond the TTC simply not wanting to do so. And, apart from its supposed length, what is wrong with using Coxwell and Eastern (and indeed all of Eastern east of Coxwell for Queen East and Kingston Rd. pull-ins and pull outs) to gain access to Commissioners yard? There is already special trackwork at Queen and Coxwell, with few residential noise concerns that haven’t been part of the aural landscape of that intersection for almost 90 years! There is also no Senior’s residence to be concerned about as well.
Steve: A link from Coxwell is much longer than one further west, and it would be difficult to run in mixed traffic given the way events at nearyby parks have a bad habit of fouling up the traffic. I discuss the issues for this route in the detailed backgrounder linked from the main article.
LikeLike
It looks like the property issue at Russell is just lack of imagination. Try thinking like the TTC does and you will understand:
Obviously the first thing they factored into the plan was a truly perpendicular junction at this location. This really would cut into the neighbouring property. Had they simply placed the new switches in the straight part of the track where it runs on an angle and then swung wider curves in a bit of an ‘S’-shape to connect with the existing yard tracks, then we wouldn’t be having this discussion. But that plan doesn’t involve ‘simplistic’ geometry, so we’re back to expropriating property.
LikeLike
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I understand Councillors Bussin and Fletcher supported the LRV Ashbridges Bay Site from the beginning.
Now, did Councillors Bussin and Fletcher take into consideration how the TTC would connect the LRV Yard at Ashbridges Bay to the TTC tracks on Queen Street? It’s mind boggling that both Councillors would vote in favour of this LRV facility at Ashbridges Bay, yet without knowing where the connecting routes in either of their Wards would be? ( or did they know….hmmmmmm…..Leslie Street..?? )
Steve: The site selection has been known for some time, and it does not take a genius to figure out that Leslie would be the proposed access route. There are multiple issues involved here including local ward politics (many people oppose conversion of the site from open space to a carhouse) and some rivalraies between the two Councillors. Both would have preferred the Lever Bros. site east of the Don, but it has only recently become available (in the sense that most of it is inactive). Even then, the owners do not want to sell, and the City would have to proceed through an expropriation just to get the property, let alone do anything with it.
LikeLike
Regarding Peter’s comment, yes Fletcher and Bussin voted for the deal last December at council. It was part of some great “deal” that the City of Toronto did with the Port Authority. In December they knew the land was for the TTC and the TTC was recommending that the route went right up Leslie.
I mentioned this earlier, you can likely torch any business at Leslie/Queen because of traffic issues in the future (except the Duke!). How about going to Gios restaurant when they are tearing up the intersection? Ouch.
Also the Canadian Tire/Shoppers will likely see a decrease in customers because that corner is going to be a traffic nightmare from 4:00pm till 8:00pm every weekday. I’ve talked to staff at Shoppers and they say customers drive over from the Beaches (because of the easy parking).
LikeLike