News   Jul 12, 2024
199 Church Showcases Heritage Facade and Artwork at Street Level
 825     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Six Points Plaza Redevelopment Advances With 36-Storey First Phase
 744     0 
News   Jul 12, 2024
Trading Spaces: Can Real Estate Conversion Help Boost Housing Supply?
 314     0 

GO Rail Fantasy Maps

Covering the tracks and adding a second level of platforms could improve capacity. However with the new concourse being built below the existing one any track going low would have to go VERY low and then we run into things like water tables etc. Mind you other cities have dealt with this so it is just going to take someone with some vistion and cojones to propose it and build it.

One way I think to improve passenger capacity at Union is to extend the (new or current) concourse level under Bay/York sts with full service to the platforms, ticketing and access to the PATH system. You could intercept a whole bunch of people this way.

North Toronto absolutely must be included in any plans to relieve Union. Even if it's just VIA/Amtrak non HSR trains and GO Trains coimg from the far reaches of the system (K-W, Peterborough, Hamilton, Niagara Region) trips like these would not be excessively hampered by moving them from Union to North Toronto as even if they had to complete their trip on the subway it would still be a fraction of their overall trip time. It may also serve to build a daughter station at Dupont.

After that is North Toronto is unable to absorb enough ridership then we have to look at an additional station, but where would we put it? Liberty Village? That is still a way's from the DT core, somewhere in the East? Without a DRL how will riders get DT. Exhibition would seem the best choice, already well served by transit, new LRT routes are on the books and the DRL could stop there as well. The trick with any of those options is to build the station on the existing lines without comprimising the throughput of the lines feeding into Union.
 
I don't think putting stations at Liberty Village, Exhibition, or West Don Lands is going to help much. We already have a station at Exhibition, and its barely an afterthought in terms of relieving capacity in any meaningful way. A DRL link from these outer downtown stations might help, but there will continue to be just as many people bound for the financial district who will alight at Union and walk to the office.

Plenty of other cities have dealt with this problem already, and the consensus seems to be a new station in the core with tunnels to connect to the existing railway network in multiple directions. I can't see any cheap solution to this problem in Toronto, short of possibly using the Rosedale Valley to get a station pretty close to Yonge and Bloor. But thats a long way off.
 
Major rail stations at Union, Pearson and Summerhill should be more than enough for capacity in the city, even if the GTA were to double or triple in population. Union would definitely require a fair bit of work with the station design, but I think that's been established. Pearson could actually accommodate a fair bit of rail trips through Go and Via if the rail corridor were to be diverted under the airport and forming a transit terminal with connections via Eglinton and the Mississauga Transitway. Summerhill would be useful for a midtown Go line and express rail to Peterborough, but Agincourt might be a good candidate for that too, maybe having a line from Peterborough stopping in Agincourt to hook up with Sheppard and the Stouffville Go line, and then a terminus stop at Summerhill. However, other than that I don't see much use for the station. It could be very useful with a midtown go line though.
 
I pretty much agree with Second_in_pie about Summerhill. Useful for a GO midtown line, but thats about it. If there was a rail line that served North York as example, it might be different since that is becoming a rather important destination point in itself. Even then it would be questionable.

One thing Summerhill could be good for is temporary rerouting of some trains when major Union Station construction takes place. Particularly on weekends it could be a great way of keeping parts of Union train free to facilitate certain construction phases. The city, and transit, are basically centered on Union Station. That will only grow in the coming years and the only way to deal with capacity problems at Union is to attack it directly.
 
I think GO should convert Mississauga and 407 Transitways (and the transitway through Etobicoke to connect between them) to Rail eventually. This new rail corridor directly connect the airport, York U, and several Urban Growth Centres: Langstaff-Gateway, Markham Centre, and Downtown Pickering (using existing rail corridor east of Markham Centre, the main line of CN). This new rail corridor combined with the existing Georgetown corridor would also allow MCC and airport a direct connection to Union. Milton line would not have to be diverted. Also this allow the CN main line to be mostly untouched west of Markham Centre. North Toronto is not that useful for commuters anyways, is it?

A direct connection between Downtown Pickering, Malvern, SCC and Union can be achieved by using the Scarborough RT corridor. The RT itself would have to be demolished of course. You can see my fantasy map showed all this and more.

Union has a lot of tracks. I don't see why there would be any capacity problem, especially if more two-way service is added. If trains go straight through in the same direction through interlining of routes, it doesn't seem like capacity will be big deal. This has been pointed out by someone a long time ago.
 
I'd love to see both the rail corridor and the Gardiner buried and a linear park and grand avenue (as a sort of collectors for the highway underground) built on top. But after Boston's Big Dig, I doubt the appetite is there for something that big anymore.

The Crosstown would be the other big deal for me.
 
doady said:
Union has a lot of tracks. I don't see why there would be any capacity problem, especially if more two-way service is added. If trains go straight through in the same direction through interlining of routes, it doesn't seem like capacity will be big deal. This has been pointed out by someone a long time ago.
Click to expand...

If you look at the second-last document here http://www.gotransit.com/estudy/en/archive/previous_studies.aspx (titled: Lakeshore Corridor 2031...) and read page 40 you can see that the anticipated service level for the Lakeshore Line alone will require 6 dedicated platforms at peak. Union has 14 tracks, so thats 43% of capacity just for Lakeshore GO trains, which do run through the station. Of course all the other GO lines have planned service expansion, as does VIA, and the Airport Rail Link may take up some space.
 
I don't quite get why it'll need 6 platforms. Even if the trains were down to running every 5 minutes, I mean, the subways are okay with running more frequently, what's so hard about replicating that at least a bit with Go trains? Or is the 6 platforms based on the current way that Go operates?
 
Second_in_pie said:
I don't quite get why it'll need 6 platforms. Even if the trains were down to running every 5 minutes, I mean, the subways are okay with running more frequently, what's so hard about replicating that at least a bit with Go trains? Or is the 6 platforms based on the current way that Go operates?
Click to expand...

GO Trains have longer layovers at Union? Only thing I can think of. Also Union is kind of like a terminal station on the subway (I know some lakeshore lines travel through Union however passengers treat it as a terminal and so GO must as well) and there is certainly a delay at the subway's terminii that could be helped with multiple platforms. If GO only used one or two platforms at Union the trains would likely back up on the line and that would affect throughput of the tracks surrounding the station.
 
It would have to be using the current diesel bilevel trains. I just can't imagine RER-style service to require 6 platforms to maintain fast service (15 minute frequency at the best,) on a single line.
 
The report assumes electrification on Lakeshore, but there are likely to be some diesel routes well into the future, running mostly rush hour service. Diesel GO trains are very heavy and accelerate slowly compared to a subway, so it takes longer to clear the platform for the next train. Secondly Union Station's platforms are narrower than subway platforms and, unlike at a subway station, practically the entire train gets off at Union. GO doesn't want to run their trains out of the station while passengers are still clearing the platforms, so they wait. Even a slow moving train running next to a full platform is a serious safety risk.

Contrast the situation with the RER (or any S-Bahn). They run fast electric trains, into big stations with plenty of platform space for waiting passengers, with passenger load spread out throughout a number of stations in the city centre. That last point may never apply to Toronto, unless our business district really expands east and west along the rail corridor, or we build an GO tunnel under Bay St.
 
Here is a quick but useful comparison of the platform area at a modern, European rail station and Union Station. First up is Berlin Hauptbanhof.

berlin-hauptbahnhof.jpg


And now Union. (source: Torontoist Flickr image pool).

GOTrain_trainshed.jpg


I think the point I am getting at should be immediately clear. If not, then look at the platforms. Berlin is not an exception either...most new rail stations have large, spacious platforms. This is not uncommon among European rail stations either. In fact most have platforms that are at least a bit larger, if not dramatically larger than those at Union (and I would add the same situation exists at Gare Centrale in Montreal as well).

And yet these stations push through a remarkable of trains and people everyday. This is why the number of platforms does not directly translate into capacity. You can push a lot of trains through, but it is also about pushing people through the station, onto the platforms, and into the trains.

I think for Union to increase capacity it would have to redesign its platforms to handle all the people, in other words take some tracks out and put in wider platforms. And that is not a small task.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top