- Thread starter JasonParis
- Start date
fanoftoronto
Active Member
I'm seeing a few secondary entrances as elevators only. King-Bathurst, Queen-Spadina, Osgoode.
It's still baffling to me that Osgoode transfers are going to be so long! At peak traffic it's going to take 2-3 minutes to go between track level of OL to Line 1 or vice versa. Per person, per day, for the rest of the life of the Ontario Line.
The with the cost needed to go down so deep to mine the station, added to the recurring additional cost of lost time due to long transfers for passengers should easily outweigh the engineering cost and challenge of coming shallower at that station and underpinning the current station for a seamless transfer. Cut-and-cover the station. You're closing Queen street West for years anyway!
It's still baffling to me that Osgoode transfers are going to be so long! At peak traffic it's going to take 2-3 minutes to go between track level of OL to Line 1 or vice versa. Per person, per day, for the rest of the life of the Ontario Line.
The with the cost needed to go down so deep to mine the station, added to the recurring additional cost of lost time due to long transfers for passengers should easily outweigh the engineering cost and challenge of coming shallower at that station and underpinning the current station for a seamless transfer. Cut-and-cover the station. You're closing Queen street West for years anyway!
afransen
Senior Member
Cut and cover would be very difficult, I imagine, with the amount and complexity of utilities on Queen.
fanoftoronto
Active Member
Completely agree, it would be extremely complex and very difficult to with around the existing utilities under Queen street. But digging down 35 m at 2 locations and mining out 100 m worth of track is also extremely complex and very difficult.
Is moving or working around the utilities on Queen impossible? No, it is most definitely possible. So they definitely could've done it and by so doing, made the transfer at Osgoode station so much more straightforward and convenient.
There are pros and cons to each decision that is made. I'd like to see these pros and cons laid out objectively. I refuse to take Metrolinx at their word. Seeing the absolute trainwreck that is the Crosstown right now, Metrolinx does not deserve any amount of trust.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
Interesting, thanks. I’ve used an elevator station (ok, it did have a small winding staircase to use but literally nobody used it) in London a few months ago and it worked OK.. but it was a pretty quiet station with low passenger volumes.
I’d be interested to see how the elevators work when a busy train lets 200 passengers off at once here.
I’d be interested to see how the elevators work when a busy train lets 200 passengers off at once here.
Northern Light
Superstar
To add to @fanoftoronto 's thoughts above.....
Cut and Cover on Queen is what they are doing just to the east.
Its absolutely feasible.
Lets be clear on why we're where we are at this juncture.
1) Metrolinx gave a clear mandate to those working on this project that they wanted to touch existing TTC infra. as little as possible. They did not want to underpin if they did not have to, and if they must, then as little as possible.
This was shaped by their experience on the Crosstown where the underpinning project, particularly at Yonge has not gone as smoothly as one might have hoped; but it was also an attempt to control costs and scope-creep.
2) Metrolinx approached the City with several alternative options at Osgoode, only one of which was worth exploring meaningfully which was the one that involved University Park, and the City stifled that on the basis that they were not ready and did
not have the mandate or funds to begin that project.
3) Metrolinx, to my knowledge, did not raise the idea of extending cut and cover west to University Avenue as they thought the City would object, and because the single largest benefit of doing so would have been to move the TBM extraction site into the Queen St ROW, but in doing, so, it would have (presumably) worked with putting the station building into the Queen St. ROW, which would have meant a permanent closure of a portion of Queen West. Aside from any objections from the City, that then entails the complexity and cost of a completely new design for Queen West in the applicable section, including looking at the streetcar alignment which might have to shift for a station building. This also would have triggered an underpinning project, adding costs. It also would have meant, at least for a short time, a 50-100% closure of the University-Queen intersection.
Editorial: While its possible Mx came to the right conclusion; many of us feel otherwise, in part, because many people aren't aware of what I posted above, and even I don't have the internal, high-level assumptions of dollar-cost and time-cost to the various choices; some of which may not have been been subject to modeling because they were screened out super early.
@fanoftoronto clearly identifies that the penchant for secrecy and fuzzy language by Mx, which means there is real doubt about the choices made, and people feel there ought to have been a more public, transparent weighing of those.
That said, lets not re-litigate that again, as we've discussed this as nauseam previously. I just wanted to offer the above synopsis for those who might have missed some earlier discussions.
Last edited:
CapitalSeven
Senior Member
Given the lack of another station south and east of Corktown, I wonder about the decision to put an emergency entrance on Front rather than a secondary entrance for bus transfers and patrons of the Distillery District. Seems like cheaping out.
generalcanada
Senior Member
what im more curious about is why the stations at moss park, corktown and queen spadina are so deep.
those 2 line 1 stations i get, but why couldn't they like incline the tunnel to get shallow especially at moss park being cutncover.
Or are the condo buildings with the deep parking garages and utilities a problem?
those 2 line 1 stations i get, but why couldn't they like incline the tunnel to get shallow especially at moss park being cutncover.
Or are the condo buildings with the deep parking garages and utilities a problem?
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Spadina is a odd duck - with that much space devoted to the elevator bank, you can probably put a pair of escalators in scissors format.
I have used them at London and Barcelona before and it is ok - it does have a bit of a creep factor common to all elevators in truly public spaces (as opposed to quasi-public/private space).
AoD
I have used them at London and Barcelona before and it is ok - it does have a bit of a creep factor common to all elevators in truly public spaces (as opposed to quasi-public/private space).
AoD
adys123
Active Member
There are a few developments happening along Queen Street that have basements that could conflict with the station. Additionally, the fewer utilities that have to be moved generally help to reduce risk. We all know how outdated some of the City's plans are and that "secret" utilities come up quite often.
Also, there are likely other considerations on energy use, and efficient vehicle operations to minimize maintenance requirements from varying grades too much along the alignment.
fanoftoronto
Active Member
I would argue that having stations shallower than the rest of the tunnel actually helps with the energy usage. The tunnel goes up when the train needs to slow down entering the station, meaning less braking is required to slow the train down. The tunnel then goes down when leaving the station, meaning less acceleration is required by the motors to get up to speed.
I don't know, many aspects of Ontario Line are shady and unnecessarily complex. But at least we're building it!
KhalilHeron
Active Member
The non-mined stations here (Moss park and Corktown) look overly complex with massive mezzanines. What is all that space going to be used for? Hopefully, they have some use and we're not paying for it to just sit empty all day.
Aplus23
Active Member
Don't elevators induce safety concerns that escalators solve, such as open airness and not being confined to small spaces, or an I being too liberal here.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
nfitz
Superstar
It's been many decades since I first heard about it. Didn't the Montreal Metro start incorporating this into designs in the 1970s?