Toronto Spadina Subway Extension Emergency Exits | ?m | 1s | TTC | IBI Group

Yea it would make more sense for a commuter rail station that was heavily trafficked that wouldn't depend so much on it's environment.
 
Why build flat, level parking lots instead of multi-level garages? At 1.3 (at most 1.6) people per vehicle, we will be wasting a lot of real estate that will sit empty overnight and gather oil drops during the day. How much snow will be piled up and stored after a snowfall from those parking lots? They should have designed garages to hold those vehicles at the 407 station, that would provide cover during rain and snow and provide a shorter walk to the station entrances.
 
Because it's cheaper. If they need more parking in the future they can add them ... and it can come out of another budget than this project; presumably Region of York.
 
It's a gross simplification and obviously not the sole cause of infrastructure inflation, but the trends in subway station size and design is sort of like the old story about why housing prices have increased so much. Back in the 1950s, everybody could afford a home, but a new home was a 900 square foot bungalow with a gravel driveway and a tiny kitchen. In 2010, everyone is mortgaged to the hilt, but a typical house is a 2200 square foot McMansion with granite countertops and a double car garage.

Similarly, the TTC has gone from a subway that could be built from wartime farebox revenues, but had stations directly below downtown streets with just one entrance and exitway to gargantuan airport-terminal sized affairs in the middle of nowhere with a stadium's worth of entrances and exitways.

Luckily there are subway-like solutions like the Canada Line in Vancouver, which I cite a lot, but that's because I think it is a "back to the basics" subway line that largely avoids all of the pitfalls of over-the-top designer subways like the Spadina Line, the Washington Metro and the extensions to the Montreal metro. It has simple box stations with only one entrance and exit and largely does away with surface transit transfer facilities (which are nice, but expensive); it serves the central and inner city - where developers and people who are interested in buying urban condos actually want to live, as opposed to trying to court suburbanites out of their cars - which is a Sisyphean task, if there ever was one - or encouraging anemic urban-style growth on the suburban fringe.

What I'm basically saying is that Vancouverites got a DRLequivalent built to 1954 TTC standards, while we're getting some Dubaiesque/Beijing Olympics herculean rapid transit line to some big box stores.
 
Hipster Duck said:
...

What I'm basically saying is that Vancouverites got a DRLequivalent built to 1954 TTC standards, while we're getting some Dubaiesque/Beijing Olympics herculean rapid transit line to some big box stores.
Click to expand...

The 1954 standard had no elevators, escaltors were optional or non-existant, one exit was okay, platforms could be narrow, etc..
 
^Obviously the Canada Line wasn't built according to the 1954 official standards for subway station design ratified by the TTC. I wasn't being literal, but you should get the point: part of the secret to building a rapid transit line that is twice as long, has three times as many stations and costs half as much as the Spadina line has to do with having simple, utilitarian subway station designs.
 
Hipster Duck said:
What I'm basically saying is that Vancouverites got a DRLequivalent built to 1954 TTC standards, while we're getting some Dubaiesque/Beijing Olympics herculean rapid transit line to some big box stores.
Click to expand...

But Vancouver didn't get that. Their stations are 40m long when a single TTC subway car is 23m long. The Yonge line stations are long enough that the TTC is considering adding a smaller 7th car to a train, but in Vancouver they wouldn't be able to fit a two car TTC train.
 
We love over building new suburban stations that will sit empty except during peak hours (ie Downsview). We also like to complain a lot on what gets built as we are never satisfied with the result.

My personal thoughts atre that these stations will be beautiful but will be very expensive to maintain. They could have reduced the budget for the stations and used it to fix/renovate some of the older stations.
 
Luckily there are subway-like solutions like the Canada Line in Vancouver, which I cite a lot, but that's because I think it is a "back to the basics" subway line that largely avoids all of the pitfalls of over-the-top designer subways like the Spadina Line, the Washington Metro and the extensions to the Montreal metro. It has simple box stations with only one entrance and exit and largely does away with surface transit transfer facilities (which are nice, but expensive); it serves the central and inner city - where developers and people who are interested in buying urban condos actually want to live, as opposed to trying to court suburbanites out of their cars - which is a Sisyphean task, if there ever was one - or encouraging anemic urban-style growth on the suburban fringe.
Click to expand...
You can't conflate design quality with size, though. What about the downtown Montreal Metro stations? Some are more compact, the transfer points are appropriately spacious, but all have exceptional attention to design quality, finishes, and art, and their subway was originally less expensive than ours. The alternative bare bones stations give too much of a "New York lite" or "generic North American city" look, which does absolutely nothing for the city where it counts: public spaces through which hundreds of thousands of people pass and spend time in each day.

These stations will be around for generations, so there should be some initial investment in design. I think the Canada Line will prove to be perceived as regrettably bland in time. There are a lot of examples around the world of stations that aren't so elaborate in scale but which look great nonetheless. The important thing is not to throw design and aesthetic concerns about the window, but rather look at the different possible scales and strategies to achieve genuinely good design. Getting some lighting, ceramics, and industrial artists to work with a local architect in designing a station from the beginning on a smaller scale could produce a polished space that people can be proud of without such a huge budget.
 
The area around future Sheppard West station is pretty busy. If I am not mistaken, a TBM is being assembled:

tbm1.jpg


tbm2.jpg


tbm3.jpg
 
Are we seeing Yorkie and Torkie? :) I wonder why both of them are in the same location; maybe tunnel building work will start there going north and south?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top