Toronto Spadina Subway Extension Emergency Exits | ?m | 1s | TTC | IBI Group

Yeah, those names were approved back in November. There as still quibbling about the two York Region stops which is why they got held until this month, finally. The November report is here.
No they didn't approve them back in November. The report went to the commission, but it didn't approve the recommendations. What they did, from the minutes is send it back to Staff for a follow-up report, and recommended that Steeles West be instead "Steeles-Black Creek Pioneer Village" or "Black Creek Pioneer Village" and that Finch West and Sheppard West be reconsidered..

We are still waiting for the report back to TTC for the proposed names.
 
No they didn't approve them back in November. The report went to the commission, but it didn't approve the recommendations. What they did, from the minutes is send it back to Staff for a follow-up report, and recommended that Steeles West be instead "Steeles-Black Creek Pioneer Village" or "Black Creek Pioneer Village" and that Finch West and Sheppard West be reconsidered..

We are still waiting for the report back to TTC for the proposed names.

Ugh. Just call it Steeles West please.
 
I really don't know if it's necessary to mention Black Creek in this station name--it's not the biggest destination. That said, it's not uncommon for other cities to have much longer subway station names. Mt. Vernon Sq/7th St-Convention Center and Woodley Park-Zoo/Adams Morgan in Washington; Bedford Pk Blvd/Lehman College, Sutphin Blvd/Archer Av/JFK Airport, Jamaica Center Parsons/Archer in New York; Villejuif/Paul Vaillant-Couturier in Paris.
 
I really don't know if it's necessary to mention Black Creek in this station name--it's not the biggest destination. That said, it's not uncommon for other cities to have much longer subway station names. Mt. Vernon Sq/7th St-Convention Center and Woodley Park-Zoo/Adams Morgan in Washington; Bedford Pk Blvd/Lehman College, Sutphin Blvd/Archer Av/JFK Airport, Jamaica Center Parsons/Archer in New York; Villejuif/Paul Vaillant-Couturier in Paris.
There is a subway station in Atlanta that has a mouthful name: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dome_/_GWCC_/_Philips_Arena_/_CNN_Center_(MARTA_station)
 
No, and it cost millions in engineering to move the roof supports away from the platform edges as a result of their elimination.

Why couldn't they have just kept the supports so that in the future they could install it?

It looks to me that adding platform doors will costs millions more to add roof supports.
 
Why couldn't they have just kept the supports so that in the future they could install it?

You can't. Without ATO the train could have parked with the doors immediately next to a support pillar. Not to mention the risk that someone leaning on a pillar could be sliced into 2 by a train arriving at a station.

Without a wall guaranting separation of train and passengers, the roof supports had to move.

I'm not certain why it was decided ATO could not be depended on. Perhaps because of the complete failure of ATC on Sheppard?
 
Why couldn't they have just kept the supports so that in the future they could install it?

Because without the platform screen doors there is a danger created by having supports close to the platform edge that people will walk around, and if ATO isn't there on day 1 then it really causes problems when trains stop and open doors at the location where the support sits.
 
You can't. Without ATO the train could have parked with the doors immediately next to a support pillar. Not to mention the risk that someone leaning on a pillar could be sliced into 2 by a train arriving at a station.

Without a wall guaranting separation of train and passengers, the roof supports had to move.

I'm not certain why it was decided ATO could not be depended on. Perhaps because of the complete failure of ATC on Sheppard?

The Jubilee line in London operated with platform edge doors and without ATO for 10 years. Not optimal, but certainly doable.

What are you referring to when you mention "the complete failure of ATC on Sheppard". Sheppard has never had ATC installed.
 
They've been testing speed control, which is a component of ATC, on Sheppard for years now... I guess they still haven't finished it?
 
The Jubilee line in London operated with platform edge doors and without ATO for 10 years. Not optimal, but certainly doable.

It requires an increase in dwell time (it took them a long time to line-up to the doors). This would reduce train frequencies throughout the system including downtown which decreases capacity of the system.

Yes, it could be done, but it would make a lot of riders very unhappy.

What are you referring to when you mention "the complete failure of ATC on Sheppard". Sheppard has never had ATC installed.

Sure it does, kinda. Sheppard's signal system is a kind of hybrid between ATC and wayside signalling allowing holds, reverse-running, etc. It's not moving block but most of the other useful capabilities are in the software kit.

Of course, we never installed the train component, not even in the form of a speed control system, and continue to use the wayside signals. Originally the intention was expand the system to the Yonge line after installing train kits and various other bits.

Moving block is a nice feature but I'm not certain the convoluted set of systems being installed on Yonge for ATO will include that.
 
Last edited:
It requires an increase in dwell time (it took them a long time to line-up to the doors). This would reduce train frequencies throughout the system including downtown which decreases capacity of the system.

Yes, it could be done, but it would make a lot of riders very unhappy.

If you continued to have peak hour short turn at St. Clair West, Glencairn, or Downsview there would be no effect on frequency.

Oh, it's not optimal for sure and I'm not saying they should do it. But if the concern is that ATO is a few years off then it's wrong to say that it would be impossible for them to make do for the time being.

Personally, I think the half-height platform edge doors which don't require extra ventilation and can be more easily added later are a better option.

Sure it does, kinda. Sheppard's signal system is a kind of hybrid between ATC and wayside signalling allowing holds, reverse-running, etc. It's not moving block but most of the other useful capabilities are in the software kit.

Of course, we never installed the train component, not even in the form of a speed control system, and continue to use the wayside signals. Originally the intention was expand the system to the Yonge line after installing train kits and various other bits.

Moving block is a nice feature but I'm not certain the convoluted set of systems being installed on Yonge for ATO will include that.

If it doesn't include in-cab signalling or speed control, can we even call it ATC? Reverse running isn't a feature that requires ATC. Just sounds like a regular wayside signal system to me. Perhaps a bit more advanced than on Yonge, but still just wayside signals.

I thought the whole point of the Yonge upgrades is to install moving block? If they're sticking with fixed block then where are the capacity improvements coming from?
 

Back
Top