[kEiThZ]

I honestly wish the feds would capacity defending and user experience improving projects like this, before just system expansion.

 

[nfitz]

It's not a shocker that PSDs cost money, but what completely amazes me is the sheer cost cited. The TTC is citing up to 55 million per station.

Perhaps I am being incredibly naive, and someone with far more construction experience can tell me why I am wrong, but I genuinely do not see how it can cost this much. In theory, all you do is bolt some plexiglas from the ceiling to the floor, and install some automatic doors- neither of which I can see being 55 million.

It's not that simple, though the cost per station does seem very high. The biggest issue is that unless you set the doors back a couple of feet from the platform edge, then you have to rebuild the part of the platform that overhangs the tracks, as it was never designed for that kind of weight.

Yesterday riding the UP into Union the train arrived, but there was a delay while they got the platform doors to open ... annoying when there's several staff already on the platform to sort out the problem, but how does that work in 80+ subway stations? These have to be well engineered and fool proof. It's just something else that can go wrong, and slow down trains.

 

[Frankietls]

It's not a shocker that PSDs cost money, but what completely amazes me is the sheer cost cited. The TTC is citing up to 55 million per station.

Perhaps I am being incredibly naive, and someone with far more construction experience can tell me why I am wrong, but I genuinely do not see how it can cost this much. In theory, all you do is bolt some plexiglas from the ceiling to the floor, and install some automatic doors- neither of which I can see being 55 million.

The TTC is planning that the 55 new trains for line 2 is 41 mil. per train. We are paying MORE for some walls and automatic doors than for a whole subway train- even on the low end of 44 mil? What black magic is in these platform screen doors that make it more expensive than a subway train?

Likewise, there are talks of large-scale shutdowns of the subway to install PSDs. Again, bolting some plexiglass and some automatic doors. If executed correctly, I don't see how this can even take a weekend- and I have seen Japanese subways install platform-length barriers between the last train of the night and first train of the day.

"Install platform barriers instead of screen doors" is not an acceptable solution. This is the same thing as those who yelled that subways were too expensive after Sheppard. Their solution was not, "oh wow, we're paying insane amounts for subways; we're insanely bad with money and should really figure out where all that money is going to", it was "We should just build cheaper so, accounting for the poor money handling, it ends up cheaper."

This is how we built LRT for the price we built Sheppard, and we will end up building platform barriers at the price of screen doors. Then, we will start arguing that maybe it would be cheaper to just put some railings or whatever.

Again, maybe there's a genuine reason it's this expensive, but I really don't see it, and I would love to be proven wrong and that the TTC is actually being reasonable with costs.

Structurally TTC platforms are in cantilever from the yellow strip. This part can not support the weight and vibration from PSDs. They will have partially demolish this cantilever part to install steel columns which support the PSDs, directly on station box bottom slab, and recontruct to restore the platforms. Only exemptions are TYSSE stations where the platforms are designed with PSDs in mind since the beginning.
Other major cost are the redesign of ventilation and fire-life-safety systems in case of installing full height PSDs. Could be avoided if they choose Partial height doors.
The cost cited in the report seems to refer to the full height doors option, including construction & installation as well as other soft costs (contract, legal, insurance, financing...) and cost related to disruptions impact.
The details are here in the feasibility report:
https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2025/ttc/bgrd/backgroundfile-256301.pdf

 

[McGillicuddy]

Two other things that come to mind in terms of driving up costs.

First, enclosing a platform behind screen doors might convert the space in unhelpful ways: it might turn what the building code currently considers one chamber into three distinct spaces, creating new obligations around ventilation, sprinklers, detectors, and similar equipment. It may also create wholly novel obligations in existing outdoor stations (like Rosedale or Davisville), where spaces which the building code considers outdoors may be transformed into indoor spaces, with similar results. (New ventilation, new sprinklers, new emergency egress...)

Second, the TTC can't "just bolt some plexiglas to a platform". This isn't a job where we can have Uncle Bob come down with four guys and do it in a weekend, bish bash bosh. And this doesn't reflect the TTC being bad with money: it reflects the reality of doing construction work in an underground station where the equipment needs to move 50,000 people per day. You need to hire professionals, you need to have things vetted and reviewed and sherpa'd, and if you don't, the cost of future lawsuits and remediation will exceed the savings you realize on implementation.

 

[lastcommodore]

Thanks for the responses. I didn't know that the platforms actually need to be rebuilt for that.

It's definitely not as easy as I was saying, though I still think 55 million is excessive. Again, complex things, but I have trouble thinking it's more complex than a brand spanking new subway train.

For ventilation though, I think a mesh or wall with hole cutouts should be an option. Prevents people from crossing or jumping, but lets air through. Granted, may not be so in the eyes of the beloved building code.

 

[nfitz]

For ventilation though, I think a mesh or wall with hole cutouts should be an option. Prevents people from crossing or jumping, but lets air through. Granted, may not be so in the eyes of the beloved building code.

I'd think that in terms of fire safety, you'd want an option where those already on the platform, and stuck at the end, can exit onto the tracks and flee down the tunnel.

 

[urbanclient]

It's not a shocker that PSDs cost money, but what completely amazes me is the sheer cost cited. The TTC is citing up to 55 million per station.

Perhaps I am being incredibly naive, and someone with far more construction experience can tell me why I am wrong, but I genuinely do not see how it can cost this much. In theory, all you do is bolt some plexiglas from the ceiling to the floor, and install some automatic doors- neither of which I can see being 55 million.

The TTC is planning that the 55 new trains for line 2 is 41 mil. per train. We are paying MORE for some walls and automatic doors than for a whole subway train- even on the low end of 44 mil? What black magic is in these platform screen doors that make it more expensive than a subway train?

Likewise, there are talks of large-scale shutdowns of the subway to install PSDs. Again, bolting some plexiglass and some automatic doors. If executed correctly, I don't see how this can even take a weekend- and I have seen Japanese subways install platform-length barriers between the last train of the night and first train of the day.

"Install platform barriers instead of screen doors" is not an acceptable solution. This is the same thing as those who yelled that subways were too expensive after Sheppard. Their solution was not, "oh wow, we're paying insane amounts for subways; we're insanely bad with money and should really figure out where all that money is going to", it was "We should just build cheaper so, accounting for the poor money handling, it ends up cheaper."

This is how we built LRT for the price we built Sheppard, and we will end up building platform barriers at the price of screen doors. Then, we will start arguing that maybe it would be cheaper to just put some railings or whatever.

Again, maybe there's a genuine reason it's this expensive, but I really don't see it, and I would love to be proven wrong and that the TTC is actually being reasonable with costs.

It's not that simple, though the cost per station does seem very high. The biggest issue is that unless you set the doors back a couple of feet from the platform edge, then you have to rebuild the part of the platform that overhangs the tracks, as it was never designed for that kind of weight.

Yesterday riding the UP into Union the train arrived, but there was a delay while they got the platform doors to open ... annoying when there's several staff already on the platform to sort out the problem, but how does that work in 80+ subway stations? These have to be well engineered and fool proof. It's just something else that can go wrong, and slow down trains.

I think @nfitz is inadvertently onto something, why not just sacrifice platform space to build PSDs away from the weak edge?

Having a narrow platform is totally fine when passengers can feel safe enough to lean up against a platform glass wall. Nobody stands within 1-2 feet of the platform edge on the subway anyways.

They do this in China already for express / intercity quasi-metro. The locals often call it subway, because it functions like a subway, but the PSDs are offset by I want to say 0.6-0.8 metres from platform edge. This would save a ton of money.

While you're at it, buy platform screen doors from China like Sydney did for their new metro lines to save even more money. But I'm sure @nfitz is about to go 'China bad' on me and Carney now...

Second, the TTC can't "just bolt some plexiglas to a platform". This isn't a job where we can have Uncle Bob come down with four guys and do it in a weekend, bish bash bosh. And this doesn't reflect the TTC being bad with money: it reflects the reality of doing construction work in an underground station where the equipment needs to move 50,000 people per day. You need to hire professionals, you need to have things vetted and reviewed and sherpa'd, and if you don't, the cost of future lawsuits and remediation will exceed the savings you realize on implementation.

This isn't rocket science. The Aussies managed PSD retrofits with local companies and local labour on a large section of Sydney M1. Not being a poorer developing country with weak labour protections is no excuse for quoting such an outrageously high price for PSD retrofit.

One more thing, it's not UP TO $55 million, it's effectively $58.6 million ON AVERAGE per station. $4.1 billion / 70 = $58.6 million. This journalist can't even get a basic quote right or do basic arithmetic. Even counting interchange stations separately, that's $55.4 million on average. Edit, which was already stated plainly in the report itself: "with an average cost per station of $55 million"
https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2025/ttc/bgrd/backgroundfile-256342.pdf

 

[IRT_BMT_IND]

Two other things that come to mind in terms of driving up costs.

First, enclosing a platform behind screen doors might convert the space in unhelpful ways: it might turn what the building code currently considers one chamber into three distinct spaces, creating new obligations around ventilation, sprinklers, detectors, and similar equipment. It may also create wholly novel obligations in existing outdoor stations (like Rosedale or Davisville), where spaces which the building code considers outdoors may be transformed into indoor spaces, with similar results. (New ventilation, new sprinklers, new emergency egress...)

Second, the TTC can't "just bolt some plexiglas to a platform". This isn't a job where we can have Uncle Bob come down with four guys and do it in a weekend, bish bash bosh. And this doesn't reflect the TTC being bad with money: it reflects the reality of doing construction work in an underground station where the equipment needs to move 50,000 people per day. You need to hire professionals, you need to have things vetted and reviewed and sherpa'd, and if you don't, the cost of future lawsuits and remediation will exceed the savings you realize on implementation.

The half height doors would (I assume) not have the same fire code implications as full height doors. Seeing how they are pretty much the standard for brownfield installations in Japan I suspect they have other advantages that are not captured in the TTC's evaluation matrix.

I think @nfitz is inadvertently onto something, why not just sacrifice platform space to build PSDs away from the weak edge?

Having a narrow platform is totally fine when passengers can feel safe enough to lean up against a platform glass wall. Nobody stands within 1-2 feet of the platform edge on the subway anyways.

They do this in China already for express / intercity quasi-metro. The locals often call it subway, because it functions like a subway, but the PSDs are offset by I want to say 0.6-0.8 metres from platform edge. This would save a ton of money.

While you're at it, buy platform screen doors from China like Sydney did for their new metro lines to save even more money. But I'm sure @nfitz is about to go 'China bad' on me and Carney now...
View attachment 710642

This isn't rocket science. The Aussies managed PSD retrofits with local companies and local labour on a large section of Sydney M1. Not being a poorer developing country with weak labour protections is no excuse for quoting such an outrageously high price for PSD retrofit.

One more thing, it's not UP TO $55 million, it's effectively $58.6 million ON AVERAGE per station. $4.1 billion / 70 = $58.6 million. These clowns can't even do basic arithmetic.

This could potentially be an AODA violation, if there is not enough room for a wheelchair in between the doors and the wall of the station.

 

[txlseries4]

Having a narrow platform is totally fine when passengers can feel safe enough to lean up against a platform glass wall. Nobody stands within 1-2 feet of the platform edge on the subway anyways.

People absolutely stand close to the edge all the time, either on the yellow strip or right at the edge of it, and often have no choice but to stand so close during rush hour or after events finish.

I would be extremely concerned with narrowing areas for the risk it would pose when the platform gets crowded or people have to evacuate. Creating bottlenecks is not the solution to creating a safer TTC...

 

[urbanclient]

This could potentially be an AODA violation, if there is not enough room for a wheelchair in between the doors and the wall of the station.

I am fairly sure there will be enough room, can someone figure out what the narrowest full platform width is on the Toronto subway?

This cost saving can definitely be done on some wider platforms, but the station platforms would be split at stations like Union where some mid-platform walls are inches from the edge.

If they don't want to split the platforms, they can rebuild the edge.

The point is, this cost saving measure may not be feasible for every single station, but it can definitely work for some.

People absolutely stand close to the edge all the time, either on the yellow strip or right at the edge of it, and often have no choice but to stand so close during rush hour or after events finish.

I coincidentally took the subway from narrow platform Union recently after a huge concert at Scotiabank, nobody stood on the yellow strips, or even close to the yellow strips. It's not that it never happens ok... I'm saying it's rare that that space is utilized, such that the platform is effectively narrower without PSDs to begin with. Weekday rush hour from Union, nobody on the yellow strip. Seriously where and when are you seeing people stand inches from falling onto the tracks, from getting clipped by the inbound train?

 

[nfitz]

This could potentially be an AODA violation, if there is not enough room for a wheelchair in between the doors and the wall of the station.

As you aren't supposed to cross the line anyhow, I don't see how that would be an issue.

 

[6ixGod]

I think @nfitz is inadvertently onto something, why not just sacrifice platform space to build PSDs away from the weak edge?

Having a narrow platform is totally fine when passengers can feel safe enough to lean up against a platform glass wall. Nobody stands within 1-2 feet of the platform edge on the subway anyways.

They do this in China already for express / intercity quasi-metro. The locals often call it subway, because it functions like a subway, but the PSDs are offset by I want to say 0.6-0.8 metres from platform edge. This would save a ton of money.

While you're at it, buy platform screen doors from China like Sydney did for their new metro lines to save even more money. But I'm sure @nfitz is about to go 'China bad' on me and Carney now...
View attachment 710642

This isn't rocket science. The Aussies managed PSD retrofits with local companies and local labour on a large section of Sydney M1. Not being a poorer developing country with weak labour protections is no excuse for quoting such an outrageously high price for PSD retrofit.

One more thing, it's not UP TO $55 million, it's effectively $58.6 million ON AVERAGE per station. $4.1 billion / 70 = $58.6 million. This journalist can't even get a basic quote right or do basic arithmetic. Even counting interchange stations separately, that's $55.4 million on average. Edit, which was already stated plainly in the report itself: "with an average cost per station of $55 million"
https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2025/ttc/bgrd/backgroundfile-256342.pdf

I was just about to say this…..buy it from China.