Perhaps they are waiting for the GO Expansion design phase to conclude before committing to a change in platform height. Easier to add height than remove it!
It's going to be a very costly and timely exercise nonetheless. The amount of red tape you need to go through will just make things a gong show. They already know the height they need to work towards. Why not just design for it right now
 
They aren't necessary given international examples - but North American practice is to include them, therefore more excavation is required. In the Ontario line's case - the trains will be separated from the platforms, so there's already a fire break!
For example, fare gates located above the platforms means more excavation, rather than this being located at street level.
This article by Alon Levy explains more.
 
Uhhhh has anyone noticed that Exhibition station clearly looks like it does not have level boarding and is still on the current platform height??

Platform height is a system-wide transition. Can't be done just because one station is being erected. The only possible strategy is to rough in and wait for a full scale transition project.

We would need far more specific drawings to know how easy it will be to convert later. My assumption given that the platform level is the "basement" of the design, it will be very simple - stairways and elevators will end up shorter, not longer. So the station is likely future proofed. Even ML gets that much right.

One interesting detail is that all GO tracks have a platform - there are no "express" tracks. That means that any equipment being moved between Willowbrook and Union have to fit the clearance plate for this station. If high level platforms were installed here first, all the equipment for all lines served by Willowbrook would have to be high level compatible. Those low-level door steps are the obstruction we have to work around.

- Paul
 
Platform height is a system-wide transition. Can't be done just because one station is being erected. The only possible strategy is to rough in and wait for a full scale transition project.

We would need far more specific drawings to know how easy it will be to convert later. My assumption given that the platform level is the "basement" of the design, it will be very simple - stairways and elevators will end up shorter, not longer. So the station is likely future proofed. Even ML gets that much right.

One interesting detail is that all GO tracks have a platform - there are no "express" tracks. That means that any equipment being moved between Willowbrook and Union have to fit the clearance plate for this station. If high level platforms were installed here first, all the equipment for all lines served by Willowbrook would have to be high level compatible. Those low-level door steps are the obstruction we have to work around.

- Paul
I'm assuming that Exhibition station won't be open until the OL opens, so 2030 or later. I'm also assuming that the move to level boarding will be a transition, i.e. there will be rolling stock capable of handle both platform heights. The platform height design in Ex station tells me that ML is not confident it will even have rolling stock that is compatible with the higher platforms by 2030. That is what worries me.

(Apologies for going further into detail about GO on the OL thread...)
 
I'm assuming that Exhibition station won't be open until the OL opens, so 2030 or later. I'm also assuming that the move to level boarding will be a transition, i.e. there will be rolling stock capable of handle both platform heights. The platform height design in Ex station tells me that ML is not confident it will even have rolling stock that is compatible with the higher platforms by 2030. That is what worries me.

(Apologies for going further into detail about GO on the OL thread...)
As far as I know, the plan was for the new Exhibition station to open well before that. I thought I'd seen 2025 somewhere. Certainly before the 2026 World Cup.

I can't imagine construction would last 8 years.
 
As far as I know, the plan was for the new Exhibition station to open well before that. I thought I'd seen 2025 somewhere. Certainly before the 2026 World Cup.

I can't imagine construction would last 8 years.
That would make more sense then for designing the current platform height. Still sucks that a station opening in 2025 *still* has the old platform height. Every time we build a new station or renovate an old one, even if we design it to make retrofitting higher platforms easier, it adds $$, all because ML can't seem to commit to a rolling stock plan for the platform height change.

Anyways, I'll stop the GO related discussion on this thread.
 
Uhhhh has anyone noticed that Exhibition station clearly looks like it does not have level boarding and is still on the current platform height??
1686847294006.png

Maybe I'm just misinterpreting this, but it does seem like at all platforms it shows the stairs as a set of escalators behind another set of stairs. I presume this a way to future proof for future platform raising, when we need to do so, we just raise the platform to the top of those stairs. This is the same way that new stations have been design since at least 2017.

Downsview Park Station:
hFrLPYx.jpg

(Photo Credit: Me)

Bloomington Station:
Bloomington%20GO%20Station%20platform.jpg

(Photo Credit: Robert Mackenzie from transittoronto.com)

Edit: Sorry mods, didn't realize this was still on the Ontario Line thread...
 
For the benefit of anyone who is thinking that our complaints about ML are petty or meanspirited, I am offering a list of “critical and urgent things Metrolinx didn’t get right, and/or issn’t getting done at warp speed”.

While completing the Ontario Line is arguably urgent, so are…..

1) Failure to complete the Agincourt creek bridges, preventing use of the past few years’ investment and delay to service improvement re double track to Unionville

2) Design and then cancelation of a flyunder junction at Scarborough Jct to manage conflicts between LSE, Stouffville, and VIA traffic (I personally feel it might still be the smarter option…)

3 Approval and then non-initiation of a new GO Woodbine station, which is a prerequisite to completing quad tracking on the Kitchener line and opening of an expensive set of tunnels sitting unuses under the 401/409

4) Failure to install switches connecting the east end of platforms at West harbour to the mainline, forcing a time consuming backup move for Niagara GO trains

5) Planning and then retracting a capital plan to extend LSW to Confederation station, With significant project delay and much change in scope including bridge construction at Confederation which may not be fully necessary given a downsized design

6) Slow pace and delayed construction of the rebuilding of trackage between Aldershot and Hamilton Jct, after initial completion of a third track bridge which sat unused for years - delaying the start of hourly service to Hamilton by years

7) Design and land expropriation for an Oshawa/Bowmanville routing which was ultimately abandoned, construction in the interim of a new Oshawa GO station which fit neither the original nor final plan, pursuit and promotion of other routings which were found to be substandard

8) Refusal to entertain a Park Lawn GO station to serve the dense and growing Humber Bay area, citing technical and engineering problems which ultimately were shown to be solvable

9) Decades of study and design proposals to reconfigure Union Station platforms, none actioned until after construction of new platforms at the south end which have since been demolished

10) Failure to complete negotiation of a solution with CN Bramalea-Silver despite Mr Verster’s public assurances some years ago that he was personally participating in negotiations and giving these top priority

11) Implementation of a London GO service over 30 mph track without a business case nor a capital improvement plan

Even if the end result of these reversals and detours was a better outcome, i challenge anyone to show which of these were managed with transparency, a sense of urgency, or even concern with staying the course on a plan to achieve fastest completion and lowest cost.

And I challenge anyone to show how these tortuous and unsuccessful ventures were delayed or impaired by crazy nimby’s or Boomers with antiquated ideas. Or City of Toronto intransigence. These failures are all on Metrolinx.

One can understand why with this track record ML might want to prove that they can “get one right the first time” - but rework, obstacles, and unforeseens plague all megaprojects The test is whether the right thing - or a reasonable thing - emerged in the end.

In the scope of all the wasted effort and money that I have cited above, fixing Osgoode properly is small change and small delay.

- Paul
Thanks for resurfacing this post recently. Any reason to believe that getting adults involved in GO Expansion--ONxpress, particularly DB, will help Metrolinx devolve some of the responsibility for actually making things happen and in an intelligent way, so that we get better overall management of GO network improvements?
 

Top