superman
Active Member
I prefer myself a Civic line
. Seriously though, why are we not building stations like the Eglinton underground LRT stations - standard stations that would probably give alot of savingsToronto Spadina Subway Extension Emergency Exits | ?m | 1s | TTC | IBI Group
- Thread starter 299 bloor call control.
- Start date
I prefer myself a Civic line
. Seriously though, why are we not building stations like the Eglinton underground LRT stations - standard stations that would probably give alot of savings
I prefer myself a Civic line
Most popular car in Canada, can't go wrong there, haha. And I agree. Personally I think the stations on the original Spadina line are the perfect size. Big enough to not feel cramped, yet small enough to not be extremely expensive. They also do a very good job of encorporating art into the stations, a far cry from the utilitarian design of the B-D stations. A station doesn't have to be gargantuan to be beautiful.
smallspy
Senior Member
Once you have the ground opened up, the fact that the ceilings are 20 feet versus 10 feet matters very little in terms of material and construction cost. What costs a lot more, however, is the timing, staging and manpower required to keep everything else nearby moving around smoothly. And doing all of the construction and staging at the same time - as they are doing with the extension - ups the cost even more.
What I would be worried about is why the construction allowance for "appearance" in each station doubled between Sheppard and now. A half-percentage point may not seem like much, but for each station we're talking about $5mil and more, and that adds up.
Dan
Toronto, Ont.
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
Nice to see a few acres of land around every Spadina extension station (and Sheppard, and Yonge, and probably Eglinton, and ...) filled up with entrance pavilions large enough to host a royal wedding and enough parkettes around them to permit a few holes of golf. It's fine around Rosedale station where such station & grass combo blends into the existing adjacent landscape, but it's obscene almost everywhere else. Why build transit and scream "We want development!" when you won't let development within a block of the actual station? It's not like these massively overbuilt stations are getting 3, 4+ different pedestrian entrances, either, that would greatly improve access. They generally just get two entrances that both lead to the middle of the platform.
Amy Rose
Active Member
two words. Rush hour.
Also, the place where the Spadina extension goes is the edge of the pro car suburbs, and people won't ditch their cars for a Viva/YRT bus to a station, but prefer park and ride, and then YRT could increase service for higher demands and then YRT/Viva would be needing more buses, since 30+ minute service would be unacceptable, and then further extensions will possibly highly densify, especially with the oncoming oil peak.
But why does any of that necessitate giant stations and swaths of vacant land (not even park n ride lots) around the stations?
Darwinkgo
Active Member
In Calgary less than 10% (7,370 PR spots vs 252k LRT trips) of rides start out from park and ride, with the vast majority of rides starting on feeder buses. I don't know why you think residents of Vaughan will for some reason be unwilling to use a feeder bus?
junctionist
Senior Member
I think that the size of Bloor Danforth line stations would be fine if the ceiling at platform level was twice as high, and there was a focus on unique design and art for each station. Also, in terms of scale, "cathedral stations" aren't inappropriate for terminus stations which are among most congested in the system.
Let's not forget that Montreal spent less money building their subway system yet generally have nicer stations. Some of those stations are sublime design experiences, where artists and architects worked together to design the spaces themselves. At the end of the day, station design shouldn't be a scapegoat for the high price of a subway line; the cost of tunnelling through our sandy soils is much higher than in cities where tunnels can be cut through rock. And of course, this extension is all tunnel.
Let's not forget that Montreal spent less money building their subway system yet generally have nicer stations. Some of those stations are sublime design experiences, where artists and architects worked together to design the spaces themselves. At the end of the day, station design shouldn't be a scapegoat for the high price of a subway line; the cost of tunnelling through our sandy soils is much higher than in cities where tunnels can be cut through rock. And of course, this extension is all tunnel.
nfitz
Superstar
Wow ... I thought you actually had some understanding of this stuff. I'm shocked you'd make such a comment.
Do the math ... if you knock 20 million off a station that's every kilometre or so, it's really not going to make that much difference.
And I'd hardly call the stations cathedral-like ... surely it's cheaper to leave the space open when digging down to the platform, than fill it back in with concrete, etc ... Montreal stations are much more cathedral-like than our newer stations ... and their extension was CHEAPER than ours!
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
It was a bafflingly random response. Unless Amy Rose thinks parkettes are for compact cars...
I do have an understanding of it, which is why I'm baffled at how much the TTC is quoting for the Sheppard West extension. I should have been more clear, the stations are part of the ballooning cost, but don't account for all of it, sorry for the confusion. I forgot the exact number they quoted, but it was far beyond what the 'conventional average' for subway construction is (I believe it was somewhere between 15-20% higher per km).
However, I would like an explanation as to how Montreal can get an extension done for so much less than Toronto can. I mean, I know they have thinner cars, so the tunnel diameter is smaller, but still. Yeesh. You'd think with the Quebec mafia taking a cut of the construction dollars they'd at least be on-par with Toronto, but they STILL come out ahead.
nfitz
Superstar
They are working in much simpler geologic conditions. And can use a single tunnel instead of a double tunnel.
Are you suggesting that SNC-Lavalin is under the influence of the Mafia!?!?!?!?
TJ O'Pootertoot
Senior Member
I think you have to look at the context.
The York U station is in the middle of a universtiy, for example. No surprise there's green space around that one.
Steeles is also, for all intents and purposes, at the university and any development will be along the north side of the street. UPS wasn't going to allow for condos in their parking lot.
407 is in the middle of a hydro corridor and has a parking lot so it's not designed to be in the centre of development.
VMC (or whatever it's gonna be called) is a fairly compact, urban style station.
I don't think these are "cadillac" stations. They are more spacious than the other Spadina stations because they're not confined to the middle of a roadway. Each has a nice piece of public art and they generally seemed designed to allow natural light down to the platform, which involves a more spacious design - but spacious is not the same as more expensive. Other than some nice design elements at grade, the interiors generally look pretty conservative and, frankly, grey.
Possibly you're so used to compact, functional stations that you've developed "abused rider syndrome," and can't relate to the idea of an attractive, open station that doesn't cost a kajillion dollars...
The York U station is in the middle of a universtiy, for example. No surprise there's green space around that one.
Steeles is also, for all intents and purposes, at the university and any development will be along the north side of the street. UPS wasn't going to allow for condos in their parking lot.
407 is in the middle of a hydro corridor and has a parking lot so it's not designed to be in the centre of development.
VMC (or whatever it's gonna be called) is a fairly compact, urban style station.
I don't think these are "cadillac" stations. They are more spacious than the other Spadina stations because they're not confined to the middle of a roadway. Each has a nice piece of public art and they generally seemed designed to allow natural light down to the platform, which involves a more spacious design - but spacious is not the same as more expensive. Other than some nice design elements at grade, the interiors generally look pretty conservative and, frankly, grey.
Possibly you're so used to compact, functional stations that you've developed "abused rider syndrome," and can't relate to the idea of an attractive, open station that doesn't cost a kajillion dollars...
Fair enough. I wasn't sure exactly what the specs for their tunnel were.
Hahaha, no no. I was just trying to make light of the fact that some of the construction projects in Quebec have been linked to having ties with the mafia. Seriously though, look at some of the roadwork projects that have been done, and tell me honestly that they didn't cut some corners here and there. I've seen several spots where they repave 90% of the street, but leave random patches of the old pavement in place. Needless to say, it makes for a less than pleasant driving experience when you feel like you're being tossed around in your car while driving on a roadway that was just "repaved" a month ago.
Last edited:
reaperexpress
Senior Member
The station that bothers me the most is Sheppard West/Downsview Park. The entrance is massive and it doesn't look like it will support any development near it. It seems to be designed under the assumption that it will always be in a park. But if that's the case, what's the point of even having a stop there? The industries on the north side won't make much use of it, and Downsview Park isn't really that large of a trip generator.