smallspy said:
Those are the other two that I am aware of, yes. It strikes me that under Birchmount on the BD would have also been a logical place to leave a potential station location, but the line profile doesn't indicate that.

Dan
Click to expand...
The lack of a station on the BD at Birchmount is no doubt due to to the high cost of the Kennedy extension at the time which itself was caused by the extension having to be built underground due to local opposition and CN not wanting to cooperate with the TTC in regards to the GECO subdivision. Had the extension been built at the surface like it was between Vic Park and Warden than I think there would have been a good chance of a stop being built at Birchmount.

In fact this isn't the first time this has happened. Back when the Spadina Extension of Line 1 was being planned the TTC originally proposed a station between St.Clair West and Eglinton West at Glen Cedar Road called Vaughan. This station wasn't built due to the section of the line being buried after residents of York made it clear they didn't want anything running through the Cedarvale Ravine not a highway nor a subway. The only map I could find of this has the station as part of the Bathurst Street alignment but I assume the station would have been retained even with the highway alignment had either the highway been built or local opposition not as fierce.

EHMASSiWoAIjQdf.jpg
 
JSF-1 said:
The lack of a station on the BD at Birchmount is no doubt due to to the high cost of the Kennedy extension at the time which itself was caused by the extension having to be built underground due to local opposition and CN not wanting to cooperate with the TTC in regards to the GECO subdivision. Had the extension been built at the surface like it was between Vic Park and Warden than I think there would have been a good chance of a stop being built at Birchmount.
Click to expand...

Maybe....but maybe not. There are no terrain features which force a particular configuration of grade separation over another other than the crossing of Taylor Creek to the east of Birchmount. But this same creek also caused the tunnel alignment to begin to deepen at Birchmount, which is part of the reason why a station can't be built there today. Elevating the line over Birchmount would have caused similar cost consternation, as the "roughing in" of a location for a station at Birchmount would have required the extension of the elevated section - increasing costs.

JSF-1 said:
In fact this isn't the first time this has happened. Back when the Spadina Extension of Line 1 was being planned the TTC originally proposed a station between St.Clair West and Eglinton West at Glen Cedar Road called Vaughan. This station wasn't built due to the section of the line being buried after residents of York made it clear they didn't want anything running through the Cedarvale Ravine not a highway nor a subway. The only map I could find of this has the station as part of the Bathurst Street alignment but I assume the station would have been retained even with the highway alignment had either the highway been built or local opposition not as fierce.

View attachment 586415
Click to expand...
Yes, but the discussion of potential stations versus ones that have or haven't been roughed in could make for a couple of chapters in the rather long book of Toronto transit plans.

Dan
 
JSF-1 said:
The lack of a station on the BD at Birchmount is no doubt due to to the high cost of the Kennedy extension at the time which itself was caused by the extension having to be built underground due to local opposition and CN not wanting to cooperate with the TTC in regards to the GECO subdivision. Had the extension been built at the surface like it was between Vic Park and Warden than I think there would have been a good chance of a stop being built at Birchmount.

In fact this isn't the first time this has happened. Back when the Spadina Extension of Line 1 was being planned the TTC originally proposed a station between St.Clair West and Eglinton West at Glen Cedar Road called Vaughan. This station wasn't built due to the section of the line being buried after residents of York made it clear they didn't want anything running through the Cedarvale Ravine not a highway nor a subway. The only map I could find of this has the station as part of the Bathurst Street alignment but I assume the station would have been retained even with the highway alignment had either the highway been built or local opposition not as fierce.

View attachment 586415
Click to expand...
If this Vaughan station were to exist, then either this station or Vaughan Metropolitan Centre station would have to be renamed.
 
81-717 said:
Yeah, the fact that a street called "Vaughan" and a neighborhood called "York" exist nowhere near the real Vaughan in York region is just... smh.
Click to expand...
Well that's because the City of York and York Region were once one and the same; York County. Or more accurately the City of York was once the Township of York which was part of York County. The City of Toronto wasn't fully part of York County but was still involved in the wider regional planning and I believe was also the seat of the county government (like how Guelph isn't part of Dufferin County but still works with it and is the county seat). So York County was made up of everything that makes up today's York Region and Toronto. Things started to change first in 1913 when the Village of Leaside was carved out of the township. In 1923 the Village of Forest Hill was carved out of the township, and then in 1924 the northern part of the Township broke away and became to Town of North York. This split the Township in two so the eastern exclave was reorganized into the Town of East York with what remained of the old Township becoming the Town of York. The three Yorks (York, East York, and North York) alongside Forest Hill and Leaside were still part of York County along with Vaughan, Markham etc. but this would last until 1953. When the Province established Metropolitan Toronto they decided that York County would be split into two at Steeles Avenue with everything on the south side becoming Metro Toronto while everything on the north side would remain York County until 1970 when it was reincorporated as the Regional Municipality of York. So both York Region and the old City of York are both the real York, or more accurately York Region is York County while the City of York is York Township which was part of York County until 1953.
 
Last edited:
81-717 said:
Yeah, the fact that a street called "Vaughan" and a neighborhood called "York" exist nowhere near the real Vaughan in York region is just... smh.
Click to expand...
Why is this smh? Toronto and Vaughan are separate cities. Neither is obligated to set its geographical names in accordance with the other.
 
nfitz said:
Isn't the line cut and cover at Birchmount?
Click to expand...

Yes.

nfitz said:
If so, they wouldn't have any issues adding a station.
Click to expand...

@smallspy would know the details of the tunnel box placement better than I; though I have access to that........

But I would say 'wouldn't have any issues' seems like a problematic statement.

If nothing else, Line 2 at Birchmount is sitting under a Hydro One Corridor and a (barely) active CN Rail spur.

There is an existing Emergency Exit building on the west side of Birchmount, and some curious topography to deal with, beyond any private property interests one may have to buy out.

Looking East from Birchmount over Line 2:

1723117724899.png


Looking West:

1723117781995.png
 
I should say, at this point, I think the thread is tangenting a bit far off the O/L.

I know we started from a legit spot with the idea of infill stations on the O/L....... but maybe lets try to contain this and move along.
 
Last edited:
T3G said:
Why is this smh? Toronto and Vaughan are separate cities. Neither is obligated to set its geographical names in accordance with the other.
Click to expand...
Because, out of all the names they could've chosen, naming a street after a region it doesn't even connect to (not even close) seems almost intentionally misleading (Markham rd. is also a rather odd choice to me, but at least it does go to Markham... as do all other major north/south streets east of Yonge mind you), especially to someone not familiar with the city (yeah, I know there's no reason for dt-dwelling tourists to ever wander anywhere near York region blah blah blah). Then again, what else could one expect from a country that was clearly running out of names and started naming streets like "This", "That", "The other".
 
Last edited:
^I knew you were gonna give an example like that (see also: Chinatown, Little Italy, etc), but those are at least immediately obvious. Vaughan on the other hand, being in Toronto's backyard, has more potential for confusion.
 
Last edited:
The only way I can see this being a problem is if for some reason a person is using the name of a street, and no other context, to navigate their way around. I can't imagine why anyone would do this, and if they would do it, that is their own fault.

We have GPS, and before that we had paper maps, that would very easily disabuse someone of their preconceived notions, if only they use them. I see no need to take any further action. By the parameters of this argument, we need to rename Dufferin Street since it doesn't go up to Dufferin County, and Simcoe Street, since it's nowhere near Lake Simcoe or Simcoe County.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top