mdrejhon
Senior Member
York PATH options need to greatly expand, stat.
This is what I mean about signs. Leaving the York concourse to the north you see this big sign which tells you the Path is to the left. I bet 100% of people who need help finding the Path actually should be turning right at that junction.
View attachment 71432
There is a such a thing as signage overload (too many bad signs in the wrong locations). TTC, VIA, GO/RER/ST, UPX, ACME, XYZ, and someday HSR. So we need a Department of Wayfinding or a Wayfinding Improvement Association (WIA) at Union to redesign all of this properly, beautifully, simple, and non-cluttered, yet signs everywhere exactly where they need to be to make every tired commuter happy, no more, no less.For one, much of the wayfinding—as in that picture—is at about chest level, rendering it essentially useless once there's a decent crowd. I think the larger problem, though, is that there's just so little signage! Whoever's in charge of that at both Union and Pearson clearly didn't get the memo—you need to *hit people over the head with wayfinding*; yes, it should be smart and simple, but there should also just be a *bunch* of it, everywhere—double up, triple up, just have signage everywhere at different levels so one simply cannot miss it.
There is a such a thing as signage overload (too many bad signs in the wrong locations). TTC, VIA, GO/RER/ST, UPX, ACME, XYZ, and someday HSR. So we need a Department of Wayfinding or a Wayfinding Improvement Association (WIA) at Union to redesign all of this properly, beautifully, simple, and non-cluttered, yet signs everywhere exactly where they need to be to make every tired commuter happy, no more, no less.
The WIA will be like a BIA except to prevent people going MIA!
I have heard, maybe here, the owners of the HSBC building do not want the connection since it would turn their building into high traffic free way for access to Union, and it's not really designed to accommodate that. They don't want the hassle of hundreds of people walking up and down their stairs, potentially getting injured, providing security, helping lost people, etc...
PATH is generally paid for by the buildings it enters - a tunnel up to King would be lovely but who will pay for it?If Wellington isn't feasible, the tunnel will hit the main PATH if extended north to King at the Sun Life Centre.
who paid for the bit from NW corner of Union to the island on the north side of front between York and University?PATH is generally paid for by the buildings it enters - a tunnel up to King would be lovely but who will pay for it?
That part was paid for by the City (I think) as it links to a City-owned building (Union Station).who paid for the bit from NW corner of Union to the island on the north side of front between York and University?
so, could they not also pay to extend it to where ever it needs to go to actually connect to the path network?That part was paid for by the City (I think) as it links to a City-owned building (Union Station).
Of course, THEY could but "we are they" and that may not be the top priority. I am certainly not saying it would not be a good idea to extend the PATH but there are lots of sections that "should' be built - my top link would actually be CBC to Convention Centre to give a proper connection further west but I bet others have other ideas. (In fact they express them on the PATH EXPANSION THREAD ..... http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threads/path-network-expansion-various-various-various.20620/page-19so, could they not also pay to extend it to where ever it needs to go to actually connect to the path network?
Oh shit. Nevermind. Digging deeper it seems this is the current situation: (Source: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2012/pw/bgrd/backgroundfile-49650.pdf)Appears the City was willing to pay to Wellington at least.