SaugeenJunction
Senior Member
VIA serves 3 high floor stations currently. High floor means easier and faster boarding for all, and as someone who cares about the elderly and differently-abled this is important for me!
|
|
|
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
EastYorkTTCFan
Senior Member
The problem is it's easy to say that they should do something on a forum however that doesn't guarantee that it can or will be done. There are many factors on if a high floor platform could be built in the train shed at Union station, don't forget the current one for UPX was built outside of the train shed.
Another issue is that if you build a platform that is different from the others and it's needed for something that can't use it it becomes useless.
Last edited:
smallspy
Senior Member
VIA has long wanted high-level platforms at Union. It will greatly speed up the loading and unloading process there.
And considering that they will be locked in to using only a certain set of platforms and tracks - hell, they already are today - that is not a big loss in terms of the total capacity of the station.
Dan
EastYorkTTCFan
Senior Member
It's not just station capacity it's things like eltrifocation for trains (would people be too close to the overhead wire?), also things like elevators, stairs and escalators. I honestly don't see any high floor platforms happening in Union station. What Via should do is come up with some else that can be used with the current platforms. Also who knows how long we are still going to have trains that need higher platforms.
allengeorge
Senior Member
Do you know of any specific reasons why the platforms dedicated to VIA at Union could not be high-floor?
EnviroTO
Senior Member
Now you are coming up with crazy concerns. Every high-speed train in the world is high-platform, the vast majority of subway lines are high-platform. The most common reason for not having high-platform is a legacy of putting freight before passengers on railway lines, or a need for routes to support curbside on-street stops like pre-metros, River Line, etc. Despite Metrolinx running the show and having an entire network of low platforms, it built UP Express as high platform making it necessary to build two platform heights at Bloor, Weston, and future stops. Clearly even Metrolinx sees the benefits.
This is poor design and lawsuit inducing:
crs1026
Superstar
The combination of high floor and wider platforms would greatly improve boarding at Union. Just let people find their way to the platform on their own, post the exact car door locations electronically (as they started doing in Europe what - about 50 years ago?) and you eliminate the laborious and crowded queuing downstairs and repeated ticket checking. (the less you have in your hands while boarding, the better). The platform becomes a concourse. Especially good for cross platform transfers.
- Paul
- Paul
cplchanb
Senior Member
Its probably going to be a logistical challenge and they dont want to be bothered by it. To them, its finding a reason to distrupt the status quo and since theyve been doing this for 100 years, it must be the correct thing to do.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
Looking at the above image, I suppose that all that GO's new higher platforms would accomplish for VIA is to eliminate the stepstool. That would streamline their operations a bit, but it would still be a far cry from actual level boarding with automatic gap fillers.
It's also neat to get an up-close view of the metal sheet which folds down to cover the stairs at those aforementioned 3 stations with level boarding (Ottawa, Montréal Centrale and Québec Du Palais).
generalcanada
Senior Member
Just checking, everyone knows that a universal level boarding is an actual goal under the on-corr program right?
That is for every station to have level boarding with trains.
The only question is if this will apply to VIA's platforms at union/guildwood/oshawa and others as well
That is for every station to have level boarding with trains.
The only question is if this will apply to VIA's platforms at union/guildwood/oshawa and others as well
ARG1
Senior Member
I think that's up to Via if they want to invest in their own separate platforms. GO will probably have low platforms making them incompatible with VIA in terms of boarding height.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
Just checking, you know that GO's level boarding standard is for 610 mm above top of rail, but VIA trains have a floor height of 1220mm above top of rail?
That's literally the entire point of this discussion...
Last edited:
rbt
Senior Member
Is it? The Liberals had an On-Corridor and an Off-Corridor package. The Off-corridor package was all about major station upgrades including platform height adjustments. The PC Party eliminated nearly the entire off-corridor package while keeping the on-corridor package largely unchanged AFAICS (despite being split-up and repackaged).
That said, passenger loading only causes significant dwell times at a small number of stations (like Union and Exhibition) both of which are getting significant modifications.
generalcanada
Senior Member
Theyre not the same floor height?
If theyre not the same, theres no way that Metrolinx builds 1200mm shared platforms just for Via trains.
crs1026
Superstar
On Corr and Off Corr seem to be alive and well in public ML documentation, but you are correct that the station planning was pared back. If you recall the renders (they are way back in this thread, somewhere) for stations like Maple with a huge trainshed, that's probably a wise move. Certainly we won't see such grandiose Wynne/Del Duca branded stations under a development-driven station program, but station work that is mission critical is certainly continuing (Bramalea, Oriole, Agincourt, Milliken, Unionville, Weston, Mount Dennis, Woodbine, ......etc) and those stations are quite adequate in scale for their task.
One has to remember also that development funded stations get swept into the development application process for the overall development plan, and development applications are of necessity a multi year approval process. Look at Mimico as an example of that. So what may look like "cancel" is actually just "takes longer".
it would be interesting to know whether the spec's for development funded stations require roughing-in high level platforms.
As much as high level platforms are interesting, and may be essential some day, starting that program now would be a huge distraction and disruption to RER. It's enough just to get electrification started, tracks added, and 2WAD under way... without having that transition added to the scope. Let's talk about that in 2026 when RER construction is wrapping up.
I do think VIA could be allowed to build dedicated high level platforms at Union without impinging on GO. The new track arrangement may give GO enough capacity that it doesn't impact them adversely.
- Paul
Last edited: