10,000 Residents on Queens Quay West of Bay Street. to Rogers Centre

Chair: Ulla Colgrass Vice-Chair: David Trebilcock Secretary: Marcia Boyd Treasurer: Claire Sparks

18 August 2006

To: Mr. Michael Harrison,

Special Projects Officer

Ministry of the Environment

Environmental Assessment & Approvals Branch

2 St. Clair Ave. West, Floor 12 A

Toronto, ON, M4V 1L5

From: York Quay Neighbourhood Association (YQNA)

Subject: Comments on Environmental Assessment Terms of Reference - Transit Project in the Eastern Waterfront (East Bayfront, West Don Lands and Port Lands).

1. Who we are. York Quay Neighbourhood Association (YQNA) covers the waterfront from Rogers Centre to Bay Street with a population of 10,000 residents. The population around here is expected to grow to 50,000 in the near future. The waterfront is planned by the City to rely less on car traffic and to encourage walking and use of public transit. That is exactly what is happening. Few people own cars, and we are working on creating better pedestrian connections to Union Station and Toronto’s downtown.

2. We are looking forward to the great design changes that are already happening in our neighbourhood through Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation (TWRC), and eventually to development of the eastern waterfront.

3. YQNA has been actively working this past year with the City of Toronto, TWRC, and other agencies to promote improved north-south connections from Union Station to the central waterfront, focused on greatly boosting the use of public transit and safe pedestrian movement. This issue is of particular urgency given the imminent approval process for development on the south side of Union Station and the area north of the Gardiner between York Street and Bay Street. It is within this context that we make these comments.

4. Lack of overall long-term vision: The overall purpose embodied in the above-mentioned TORs states: ‘to determine the transit facilities appropriate to serve the long term residential, employment, tourism and waterfront access needs in the study area while achieving the city’s and TWRC’s objectives for land use, design and environmental excellence.’ However we think the TORs could be amplified to indicate that there is a coherent vision for connecting to the bigger ‘waterfront transit corridor’ that lies immediately beyond the study boundaries.

5. YQNA and its sister organisations along the waterfront reached a consensus as a result of participation in numerous stakeholder meetings, including the recent Queens Quay Design Competition. It is that the Toronto waterfront should become a recreational haven ‘A long spine of green waterfront along which residents and visitors could arrive especially by transit, walk or bike to their hearts’ content and explore tourist and cultural destinations, free of pollution’.

6. In Toronto, this would translate into a ‘green waterfront transit corridor’ stretching from the Beaches area in the east, to Etobicoke to the west. With the installed tourist attractions already in place, considerable demand for east-west transit can be expected. This would especially be pronounced if Toronto’s EXPO 2015 Bid is successful. It is expected that irrespective of which type of transit system is selected for the east-west spine, it will run on dedicated rights-of-way. Into this green transit corridor, multiple north-south transit connections would allow easy transfer.

7. Waterfront Study Area: Based on our experience so far, achieving a coordinated planning approach between various institutions appears to be the biggest flaw. The TORs for the EA appear about to repeat this flaw, as the boundaries do not encourage the study team to look at what is happening in adjacent areas, though connecting area plans will significantly impact the results. We recommended that York Street, instead of Bay St, be defined as the western boundary for the EA for the East Bayfront site.

8. The Union Station interface: The TOR states: “Providing a convenient link to Union Station is a key requirement of the study”. Understanding what is going on around Union Station is critical to the EA study and its likelihood of achieving a convenient connection with Union Station. The area between York St and Bay St represents the most intense pedestrian traffic moving both south and north from Union Station to the waterfront. Last year there were an estimated 14 million visitor trips to the Harbourfront Centre, the cruise ships and the island ferries. In addition almost all residents of the waterfront travel north of Lakeshore to work, shop, or to attend cultural events.

9. The TORs in the recent Queens Quay Design Competition were specifically encouraged to ‘attract more visitors to the waterfront on a year-round-basis.’ This means considerably more pedestrian traffic can be anticipated, even without taking into consideration the impact of the study area in the Eastern waterfront. The current estimates given for the total number of travelers already moving through Union Station are not comprehensive. About 43,000 are estimated to arrive on the GO Transit and VIA. No estimates are given for TTC. Total numbers are expected to double in twenty years. All numbers however relate to working week flows (a Monday to Friday design), and do not include the visitors to the waterfront, who tend to concentrate over a four-month period, especially over weekends and holidays in the summer.

10. At present, Queens Quay West is served by Routes 509/510 –Harbourfront LRT. The service runs south from Union Station in a tunnel (0.79km long) under Bay St. and then west on the surface on an exclusive right of way to Spadina, where it goes north along Spadina and west to the CNE grounds. The present transfer arrangements between the Subway and the LRT inside Union Station are grossly inadequate.

11. Above ground, there is little spare road capacity for buses to circulate or park, around Union Station. How these pedestrian and vehicle flows are handled will impact on the study area and vice-versa.

12. YQNA have proposed two principal ideas to address these issues: the first is the construction of a pedestrian connection as an extension of the PATH system along York St. (one block to the west of Bay St.); the second seeks to provide a more cost-effective solution for use of the existing streetcar tunnel under Bay Street, which currently marks the boundary of the EA study.

13. Both of YQNA’s proposals have been presented and discussed publicly and have been positively received. Unfortunately TTC has not been present at most of these meetings. The proposals are very relevant to the TORs as stated and in our opinion merit further technical study by the team preparing the EAs.

14. The attached map shows the area between Union Station and Queens Quay, bounded by York St to the west and Bay St to the east. The dark dotted lines indicate YQNA’s proposed walkway along the shortest link along York Street (under 4 minute walk). An all-weather above ground corridor would connect to an underpass below Lakeshore West. It is proposed that the pedestrian corridor would discharge into ‘Waterfront Square’ (on the site of the ‘down ramp’) at York/Queens Quay.

15. The second proposal recommends that the existing tunnel be extended below ground to into Waterfront Square. A new iconic modern glass and steel station would mark the Waterfront Entrance to Union Station. The Square would thus become the forecourt and gathering place for crowds arriving by transit to and from the waterfront.

16. An east-west green transit service would discharge and pick up passengers at Waterfront Square. An automated ‘electric people mover’ (not a moving walkway), as used in many airports, would shuttle passengers to and from Union Station. The interval between services would respond to passenger demand. The LRT is too expensive a system to carry short distance (two stops) trips from Union Station to Harbourfront and the island ferries.

17. This solution would permit the unsightly existing above ground structure to be demolished and be replaced by an east-west waterfront transit service, either maintaining and extending the LRT or introducing an alternative cost-effective transit such as hybrid buses (which can be articulated vehicles or stacked as bus-trains). The latter approach may provide flexibility in implementation of the green spine transit system at it can use the existing road network.

18. Choice of technology: The TORs give the impression that the LRT (streetcar) will emerge as the preferred solution. If so, this would require substantial investments. The cost of underground tunnelling is likely to be astronomical. It would require a new entrance to an underground tunnel to Union Station, with another unsightly ‘tunnel entrance opening’ located somewhere in the vicinity of Young St, opposite the main entrance into the Westin Hotel.

19. The raised flower beds and embankments (if the TTC design replicates the existing one to the west of Bay St) would contribute considerably to the overall ugliness of the street scene, without even mentioning the complex intersections with pedestrian traffic that would occur at Bay/Queens Quay. This intersection is also the primary entry point into the residential carparks for the Harbour Square complex of buildings.

20. Also indicated on the map in a solid black line along Bay St. is YQNA’s proposal for a possible Union Station Waterfront Entrance, linked to Union Station by the automated Shuttle Service, as described above. This would eliminate the need for another expensive and leaking tunnel to accommodate Union Station-bound traffic along the East Bay front, and allow for a continuous east west flow of the streetcar or other transit system that may be selected to meet long term objectives.

21. Timing is crucial. A failure to undertake this planning work now as part of the EA, will forever jeopardize a cost-effective solution for quick and simple access to the Toronto waterfront, for which enormous sums of money are being provided by three levels of government. All these projects will complement the initiatives by TWRC, already underway, and will have a direct impact on the future transformation of Queens Quay.

22. The risk of settling for less than well-planned long-term solutions, is high. YQNA and the waterfront community at large will be delighted to provide all the cooperation necessary towards a common vision and further detailing of these ideas.

Thank you on everyone’s behalf, for inviting these comments.

Sincerely,

Braz Menezes

Chair, Planning and Development

Ulla Colgrass

Chair, YQNA

David Trebilcock

Vice-Chair

For further information contact:

Braz Menezes (416 363-9757) Chair, YQNA Planning and Development

Ulla Colgrass (416 867-6200) Chair YQNA

MAP

Union Station

Westin Harbour Castle Hotel

Water

front Square

Harbour Square

Air Canada

Centre

Maple Leaf Square

YQNA, 55 Harbour Square Suite 2011,Toronto ON M5J 2L1 — Tel: 416-867-6200 — E-mail/Chair: colgrass@sympatico.ca www.YQNA.org or info@YQNA.org or bmenezes@sympatico.ca Tel 416-363-9757.