News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 9.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 41K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.4K     0 

And, further, simply not having anyone at all in the hospital that doesn't need to be in it. They don't want to become part of some shortcut route where it's faster to get from A to B (or more comfortable and air conditioned) so everyone is marching through it.

The important thing, given the siting of the station, is that there be an entrance/exit on the North-West corner (where the hospital is situated.

It can be designed, to have direct access to the outside w/o passing through the hospital.

That said, for hospital employees if nothing else, it would make sense to provision for direct access from such an exit, to a future building.

That could be at grade; or a mezzanine level potentially, but the exit ought to be designed to allow for it (knock-out panel)

The connection to the hospital could go to a public-facing, non-secure mall area.

If you've been in Western or Mt Sinai, among others this is now a common design feature for visitors and staff and a source of revenue for the hospital (food court, bookstore, drugstore, florist etc.)

If, for w/e reason, the latter were impractical, it could always be made a secure connection that requires a hospital ID card.
 
That would be very challenging to implement from an airflow control standpoint; which is one of the primary defences hospitals have against spread of disease.

You could have a covered walkway, perhaps even semi-walled walkway (lots of vents) but there needs to be an air-gap or physical mechanism to prevent arriving/departing trains from impacting airflow even when doors are open due to people walking through them.

True, but I think a connection would still be valuable.

Given the costs already involved, the current situation could end up being used as a reason not to implement it.
 
True, but I think a connection would still be valuable.

Given the costs already involved, the current situation could end up being used as a reason not to implement it.

Lets not over complicate this.

UHN (Toronto General) is directly connected to MARS; MARS is directly connected to Queen's Park Station.

This is already a thing.

No one is going to be walking through a patient-corridor.


Better still, from OCAD:

1594501383897.png



Interestingly, the above was a competition held in the fall of last year for proposals to beautify the tunnels.
 
Last edited:
Lets not over complicate this.

UHN (Toronto General) is directly connected to MARS; MARS is directly connected to Queen's Park Station.

This is already a thing.

No one is going to be walking through a patient-corridor.


Better still, from OCAD:

View attachment 256805


Interestingly, the above was a competition held in the fall of last year for proposals to beautify the tunnels.

This thread is 15 years old, if there's anything Toronto is good at it's over-complicating things. :p

I agree with you - we should be trying to connect subway stations we build to as many major destinations/institutions as possible. This seems like a no-brainer.

At this point I just question the government's ability to use any kind of 'common sense' when it comes to transit planning and implementation.
 
This thread is 15 years old, if there's anything Toronto is good at it's over-complicating things. :p

I agree with you - we should be trying to connect subway stations we build to as many major destinations/institutions as possible. This seems like a no-brainer.

At this point I just question the government's ability to use any kind of 'common sense' when it comes to transit planning and implementation.
I thought once we kicked city hall out of the planning it was going to go super smooth. I mean city hall really was the real gravy train blocking the Ford's. Now that the province is in charge are you suggesting that they are just as inept?
 
Found a proposed bus connection for the Scarborough Subway Extension in the 1488 pages technical report. (p.297)
Here is the link: http://www.metrolinx.com/en/greater...ension/04-RPT_SSE-EPR-Addendum_Appendix-B.pdf

View attachment 256735

Interesting to see is 102 Markham Rd is breaking up into 102 and 173 Markham North.
I'm actually disappointed that not all Lawrence buses will serve the terminal. Perhaps the westbound lanes will have an entrance similar to that of Finch West. It's really nice to see frequency increases on some of these routes though.
 
Last edited:
So this will be a totally separate line right? As in you'll have to get off the Bloor and Danforth line at Kennedy and transfer on to this line correct?
 
So this will be a totally separate line right? As in you'll have to get off the Bloor and Danforth line at Kennedy and transfer on to this line correct?
Nope. This is an extension of the existing Bloor-Danforth Line to Sheppard and McCowan. With 3 stops at Lawrence East, Scarborough Centre and Sheppard/McCowan. The RT will close down :(
 
Nope. This is an extension of the existing Bloor-Danforth Line to Sheppard and McCowan. With 3 stops at Lawrence East, Scarborough Centre and Sheppard/McCowan. The RT will close down :(

How are they gonna extend line 2 without closing down the line and or crosstown line ?
 
The same way they extended the University line when they built TYSSE without closing down Downsview (now Sheppard West)?

Ahh okok, I still believe upgrading the RT and using that corridor as the best alternative, but ahh well.

A Sheppard east extension to atleast mccowan should be plans asap
 

Back
Top