Dan416
Senior Member
Interesting that all Milton trains use Platform 4. I remember back in the day the Milton trains were pretty far back in the station. Now they're ahead of Lakeshore West.
|
|
|
GO Transit: Union Station Shed Replacement & Track Upgrades (Zeidler)
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Just linking this here:
http://uttri.utoronto.ca/files/2017/08/USRC-Thesis-Presentation-Yishu-printable.pdf
It might be of interest to some of you.
AoD
http://uttri.utoronto.ca/files/2017/08/USRC-Thesis-Presentation-Yishu-printable.pdf
It might be of interest to some of you.
AoD
Megaton327
Senior Member
Interesting read, but it's a bad time to do any passenger flow evaluations at Union given that the Bay Concourse remains closed, much of the access to the TTC and circulation within Union is closed, the lower (food court) level is completely closed, and there are spots of construction elsewhere.
I'd be interested to have Bay and the lower level open, then wait a few months for things to settle down and do thorough passenger flow evaluations at that time. Many of the platforms are dangerously crowded today but once Bay opens that provides a huge amount of additional exit/entry space.
There is definitely an upper limit to it, though, and personally I have trouble seeing how any substantive increase in rush hour service, whether to frequency or to extension of routes farther out, is possible without massive, comprehensive overhauls to the station, or construction of east and west remote stations at Spadina and ~Cherry, serving more than merely one line each. Platforms 28/29 will definitely help but not by much.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Of course, though a good model should also be able to handle an condition that is analogous to the current state of the station and produce a result that is comparable to what we are experiencing now. To me this is simply a shot across the bow for modelling that simply look at tracks and not platforms (hint hint - this is also a TTC problem)
AoD
steveintoronto
Superstar
VIA themselves had staff from Head Office (Montreal) studying exactly that at Union last week on their arrivals level. There's pressure from Metrolinx for VIA to reduce dwell time to increase the throughput of Union, but it's constricted by exactly the case of study: Bad flow on even VIA's wider platforms to the point of hindering exactly what Metrolinx wants improved. You can't vacate the platform until passengers are cleared, baggage (if any) unloaded and supplies are loaded and unloaded.
It also raises yet again the platform height debate.
I thought that study being linked was synchronicity for VIA's present examination.
Posted this notice in two other threads, but it's worth saying here too for posterity: if you have't read our story on a sit-down with Metrolinx's Phil Verster, you should if you want to know more about what will be happening at Union over the next several years.
42
42
steveintoronto
Superstar
Many thanks for the heads-up on that! He makes a case that many in the forums are reluctant to embrace:
He's talking some of the profoundly evolutionary ideas some of us have been promoting in the forums, by using Paris RER, Crossrail, S-Bahn and other "run-through RER in tunnels" as examples to learn from and emulate. He also brings up the the subject many had presumed to be cast in stone: That RER emu would be double-decker. Not necessarily so.
But in a different way, this is also going to give many posters indigestion:
And I'm not sure many Ontarians are ready for where that takes them!
Consider: "The private partner consortium that will be building and operating the RER system will make many of the key decisions, particularly on technology and the trains themselves."...extrapolate that...unless contracted otherwise, that indicates *vertical integration*! The company that runs the line(s) also uses their own manufacture (themselves or a partner company) to supply and maintain the vehicles.
I find this article refreshingly shocking! THIS is the stuff of change that can/will see progress much sooner than what would occur otherwise.
Let the braying begin!
Last edited:
TOareaFan
Superstar
crs1026
Superstar
It's extremely encouraging to hear him speaking about things that indicate a real thorough understanding of how things actually work.
I wonder if the most recent round of headlines about ML having changed the plan and caused overruns/delays to the completion of the Union Station project were attributable to Verster. Good on him if on his arrival he stopped the refurb and redirected where the plan would have just perpetuated the status quo.
I'm not sure that I would make any grandiose extrapolations that we are going to see Paris-RER style RER subways. The article says "more like a subway", not "we are going to tunnel". That can simply mean level-platform and the connect the whole line, 2-way service model, as opposed to a commute-to-core model.
It does put an end to the sillier debates about how a particular train model should be used. The vendor will likely use what they can build themselves. Equipment is the cart, not the horse.
Most importantly - he doesn't say "hydrogen" once. Sounds like stringing wires is an integral part of the RER plan. Whew.
- Paul
I wonder if the most recent round of headlines about ML having changed the plan and caused overruns/delays to the completion of the Union Station project were attributable to Verster. Good on him if on his arrival he stopped the refurb and redirected where the plan would have just perpetuated the status quo.
I'm not sure that I would make any grandiose extrapolations that we are going to see Paris-RER style RER subways. The article says "more like a subway", not "we are going to tunnel". That can simply mean level-platform and the connect the whole line, 2-way service model, as opposed to a commute-to-core model.
It does put an end to the sillier debates about how a particular train model should be used. The vendor will likely use what they can build themselves. Equipment is the cart, not the horse.
Most importantly - he doesn't say "hydrogen" once. Sounds like stringing wires is an integral part of the RER plan. Whew.
- Paul
Leo_Chan
Senior Member
Is removing tracks from 12 to 6-8 still being considered? Since the platforms are so small in width?
crs1026
Superstar
Amen. Lots of historic houses were built without indoor plumbing, but preserving them as heritage buildings does not mean we put back the outhouse and insist that visitors use it. That trainshed is the equivalent to an old time outhouse!
Donate it to a farmers' market or a kids' playground. Maybe the capybaras would enjoy it. Just don't ask today's commuters and travellers to endure it.
- Paul
SunriseChampion
Senior Member
Oh...the shed again. I got in trouble bringing that beauty up. Just pretend it's not there to make your experience of Union better. Or think of how you're living the past when Toronto was a provincial town. Only use the trains on platform 27, maybe? Anything but mention how utterly brutal (not brutalism, alas!) it is. And, ffs, never bring up the fact that you've been to some backwater town in Europe that had a more inviting train platform area.
On the other hand, the thing makes you really appreciate the sky once you're out from under its depressing cover.
On the other hand, the thing makes you really appreciate the sky once you're out from under its depressing cover.
Last edited:
crs1026
Superstar
Nope. It will be a "green roof". One eco faction fighting with another eco faction.
Heaven forbid they might have included some translucent panels and let some light in to make the trainshed more liveable.....
- Paul
TransitBart
Senior Member
I'd rather they'd included a wrecking ball and I swear that's the last time I'll comment on this heritage montrosity.
crs1026
Superstar
To give credit where due - now that the work under the trainshed is actually wrapping up, and all the construction equipment is being removed and the stairwells all have their new intended and consistent decor, it’s an improvement over the bad old days. All that is needed is one twelve foot stripe of moat-like clear glass towards each end of the trainshed. That would neither offend the heritage preservation thrust nor would it reduce the green roof square footage unreasonably.
- Paul
- Paul
