Toronto Union Subway Station: Second Platform and Concourse Improvements | ?m | ?s | TTC | IBI Group

Hipster Duck said:
This frustrates me too. Unfortunately, I've also come to recognize that rapid transit expansion is almost never about improving travel or capacity constraints, and almost always about opening up real estate development.

If you can stimulate real estate development without a rapid transit line, then a rapid transit line will go on the back burner (see DRL).
Click to expand...

That's because, it's becoming the only way to fund transit expansion. There's no business case for a line that won't spur much new growth and bring in more tax revenue. If there was more funding for subways, you wouldn't have this situation.

But with regards to Vaughan, consider the alternatives: 1) no subway at all beyond Downsview 2) Sprawling development at VCC without a subway.

Ideally, development plans would be developed with transit in mind. Why are people begrudging Vaughan for doing things right? It doesn't have to be a zero-sum fight. Places like Vaughan should be getting subways when possible. And the core should also be getting the infrastructure that it needs (eg. DRL).
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
I am not saying that what is being done isn't important - what I am saying is that given the once in a lifetime opportunity AND the importance of that station as a gateway one should think a bit bigger and have a station that is par those on say, the Spadina extension in scale and execution. If we can justify spending hundreds of millions on stations that expect a rather low number of users, the case for a bit extra for this stop certainly can be made.
Click to expand...
We're already spending more on the Union Subway station than some of the new Spadina stations. Not sure what you're looking for. The scale of the Spadina stations is achieved through their depth and the large open areas. In this case, you need all the floorspace you can get at the Mezzanine level, to accomodate all the people walking from the Train station to the PATH. The new station should be much more open space than the current one. Bonaventure also get's it's majesty from it's extreme depth ... one of the reasons it takes so long to get from the platform to the road. You can get from platform to road at Union very quickly ... compare to Bonaventure, where in the same time, you still haven't got to the fare gate, let alone the long walkway to the bottom of the endless escalator to Place Bonaventure.
1515765.jpg
 
Last edited:
kEiThZ said:
Why are people begrudging Vaughan for doing things right?
Click to expand...

Because it's at the cost of our system. A city with 1/5 our density (1/8 of Old Toronto) gets a subway link to some fields and airport hangar-sized stations, we get watered-down service. Our subway system has now delved into commuter rail territory. Might as well slap on some stickers that say GO.
 
Last edited:
Keithz:

Ideally, development plans would be developed with transit in mind. Why are people begrudging Vaughan for doing things right? It doesn't have to be a zero-sum fight. Places like Vaughan should be getting subways when possible. And the core should also be getting the infrastructure that it needs (eg. DRL).
Click to expand...

Except that the core isn't getting the infrastructure that it needs now, not even counting the long lead-time to getting it. Clearly, this is more zero-sum than you posited.

nfitz:

Not that I think anyone would do it, but a complete rebuild of the station westward such that it is aligned with the axis of Union Station, with exits aligned to both ends feeding into the future York Street and existing Bay Street Concourse would be great. And added bonus might be that you can aligned both the existing PATH connection to Royal York/RBP and future NW PATH at either ends instead of a center/detour alignment. A 3 platform arrangement with segregated boarding/disembarkment would also be nice, but that might be quite challenging.

AoD
 
Last edited:
That would be expensive! Okay, I see where your going ... but look how much it delayed the project waiting for Waterfront Toronto to cough up the money, and then to find the extra $20-million or so to cover the higher than expected bids. The current subway station project is about $160 million.

A complete rebuild and move would likely cost double that ... and require the station to be closed for a while.

I don't think the current works precludes a future third platform on the north side.
 
I do wish Union (subway) Station was redone properly. It really should be a major station. I like the idea with aligning it better with Union (train) Station.
 
Actually, Union Station could easily be moved west, and all that it would require is conversion of the existing storage tracks to a westward expansion of the existing island platform. The platform would be narrow like the existing one, but staggered platforms would solve that problem - the island platform could be extended to a total length of 200-300m long, with Downsview trains only stopping at the west end, and Finch trains only stopping at the east end.
 
44 North said:
Because it's at the cost of our system. A city with 1/5 our density (1/8 of Old Toronto) gets a subway link to some fields and airport hangar-sized stations, we get watered-down service. Our subway system has now delved into commuter rail territory. Might as well slap on some stickers that say GO.
Click to expand...

The alternative was no subway though. The Sorbara subway happened only because a certain minister pushed for it, in large part because it went to his community. This is reality. Complaining about it is pointless. The choice was subway to Vaughan or no subway. It wasn't subway to York U or subway to Vaughan. I'm glad the city made the right choice.

And besides, how much is the city paying for the subway again?
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Keithz:



Except that the core isn't getting the infrastructure that it needs now, not even counting the long lead-time to getting it. Clearly, this is more zero-sum than you posited.
Click to expand...

How so? As it stands, neither the core, nor the periphery is getting the infrastructure they need. Projects like TYSSE are one-off. It's not like building a DRL ever entered any serious discussion at all. Yet, how much is being done in the periphery? For now, it's just the Eglinton line going forward.
 
Last edited:
The suburbs were getting infrastructure it "needs": Light Rail. But the people don't want it. So IMO we should build what Metrolinx wanted to build all along: DRL and Eglinton.
 
Last edited:
nfitz:

Of course it is expensive - that's why I prefixed my statement with "Not that I think anyone would do it." I think the existing station could stay open most of the time - since you're basically building a new station instead of the even more complicated task of retrofitting an old one while it remain in use. Another plus is that depending how much space there is, you might be able to use ramps instead of stairs and escalators at either end of the station to connect to the mezzanine - which will help increase accessbility and the volume of passengers handled.

Keithz:

Need suggest the existence of a large unfulfilled demand - I don't think a good portion of TYSSE would qualify on that basis - certainly not the portion north of Steeles. And saying that DRL wasn't in the discussion is a facetious argument since we both know that the demand is there, in the form of the overcrowded Yonge line. It's not about core vs. periphery - it's about whether there is an existing need and how great that need is. But of course if you put it in the context of subway or no subway, I would have taken the one with too - but that's a political answer and we both know it.

AoD
 
Last edited:
Extending the Yonge line to Vaughan will barely make a difference to Union Station, as that is not the problem. Union is fine in the morning. Its the afternoon rush where things get more dangerous since trains arrive at Union full. In the morning, most people get off the trains before Union.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Not that I think anyone would do it, but a complete rebuild of the station westward such that it is aligned with the axis of Union Station, with exits aligned to both ends feeding into the future York Street and existing Bay Street Concourse would be great. And added bonus might be that you can aligned both the existing PATH connection to Royal York/RBP and future NW PATH at either ends instead of a center/detour alignment. A 3 platform arrangement with segregated boarding/disembarkment would also be nice, but that might be quite challenging.
Click to expand...
I wonder if extending the platforms to the west , perhaps with just staircases/ramps leading up to the PATH connections would be an option ...

3 Platforms would be nice, but tight. On Steve Munro's site is a graphic showing the future Mezzanine layout, and the surrounding buildings. It doesn't show the old station box or tracks, but if you look at the big open area in the Mezzanine, you can see an east-west row of pillars; this is the northern edge of the station box; essentially where you'd start the northern platform. The platform then, would be the same width, as the existing northern walkway to the rotunda and Brookfield Place. Enough space for the platform, if you could construct it without interfering/damaging RBC and the southeast corner of the Royal York.
 
Last edited:
rbt said:
No, but the foundations of buildings on the North side of front street do.
Click to expand...
The limits of the RBC and Royal York buildings shown on the figure, appear to be near the property line. There should be space between the current station box and the property line.

How far south of the property line do you think the existing foundations preclude digging?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top