Crosstown LRT Interchanges with the Yonge-University-Spadina Subway

The TTC meeting agenda for November 18 includes a report on the proposed designs for the connections at Eglinton and at Eglinton West Stations between the existing subway line and the Crosstown LRT now under construction.

Eglinton is a particularly complex station because the location is constrained by nearby buildings, the platform space is already at a premium with four existing links between the subway and mezzanine levels, and this is expected to be a busy transfer location.

Eglinton West is somewhat simpler in part because the existing station is offset from Eglinton Avenue and the link between the two stations will occur at the south end of the existing structure.

Eglinton Station

The existing Eglinton Station lies mainly to the southwest of the intersection at Yonge Street because this was originally land occupied by Eglinton Carhouse.  The subway is west of Yonge from Muir Portal northward, and it only angles back toward Yonge at Eglinton (originally in anticipation of a future extension).  Since it was built, the subway has been hemmed in by high rise buildings sitting above and astride the subway structure.

Originally, there was a large bus interchange area with 13 bays for the many services that fed into this subway terminal.  The slab under some of the bays corroded over the years to the point where operation of buses was unsafe, and a “temporary” terminal was established in the space formerly occupied by Eglinton Garage.  The City was in the process of soliciting development proposals for the old bus terminal lands, but this was put on hold with the decision to build the Crosstown LRT.  Eventually, a smaller bus terminal will be provided as part of the Crosstown project, and the land above will again be up for development.

If Eglinton Station remained where it is today, there would be a platform loading problem similar to the one we see at Bloor-Yonge where all of the transfer movements are concentrated at the north end.  The new design proposes to extend the platform north into an area now occupied by back-of-house functions and the southern end of the Eglinton pocket track.  This layout is illustrated generally in Appendix C of the report.

201311_EglintonStn_AppC

For details of each level of the station, please see Appendix B in the report.  There are five levels in the new Eglinton Station:

  • Street level including the new bus loop
  • Upper mezzanine
  • Subway platform
  • Lower mezzanine
  • LRT platform

At street level (page 1 of the appendix), street entrances are shown in their current locations, although this design may change as redevelopment occurs on the four corners.  A new main entrance is proposed on the northeast corner of the old bus station to the west of the existing Bank of Montreal building which houses the main entrance today.  A new exit from the extended subway platform would lie on the west side of Yonge just south of the Silver City cinema entrance.

At the mezzanine level (now called the “upper mezzanine”, page 2) there would be extensive changes.

Within the existing station, there are three links between the mezzanine and the subway platform:

  • The northernmost stairwell would be reversed and it would gain an escalator, and an elevator from the mezzanine to the subway level would be added nearby.
  • The second access stair/escalator would remain as is, and these two would be the primary routes from the mezzanine to the relocated subway platform.
  • A smaller link would replace the southernmost stair/escalator reflecting the fact that this would now be near the south end of the subway platform.

The southernmost stairway from the subway platform leads into the “temporary” bus loop.  This would no longer be on the active part of the platform, and the bus loop would, of course, be shifted north to a new island arrangement roughly where the original bus bays stand today.

The upper mezzanine is extended east and west under Eglinton and would, in the process, consume the existing passageways now linking the main entrance to other corners.  These extensions are outside of the paid area, but there are fare gates both east and west of Yonge that connect into the paid area of the LRT station and to the new bus loop.

At the subway level (page 3), the platform would extend north and would straddle the LRT structure below.  Three new stair/escalator links and an elevator would run from the subway platform to the “lower mezzanine” which is oriented east-west above the LRT platform.  A link to the new northwest exit from the station would connect into the north end of the extended platform.

The lower mezzanine (page 4) provides circulation space between the vertical links up to the subway station and the expanded upper mezzanine, and down to the LRT platform (page 5).

Typical routes through the station would be:

  • LRT to subway:  Up one level from the LRT platform to the lower mezzanine, then up another level to the subway platform.
  • LRT to bus:  Up one  level from the LRT platform to the lower mezzanine, then up two levels (one escalator) to the west upper mezzanine, then walk south to the the bus loop and up to surface level.
  • LRT to street:  Up one level from the LRT platform to the lower mezzanine, then up two levels to the east or west upper mezzanine, then up one more level to the street.

This major project requires that Eglinton Station be brought up to current fire code at an estimated cost of $50m.  This is a TTC cost, and this may be yet another line item fighting for money in the already crowded Capital Budget.

Eglinton West Station

This is a much simpler project than Eglinton Station because it lies in an area unconstrained by buildings and the relationship between the existing and new stations is physically simpler.

There are four levels in the new Eglinton West Station:

  • Street level including the bus loop
  • Upper concourse linking the new street exits
  • Subway and lower concourse
  • LRT platform

At street level (Appendix A, page 1), the existing escalators and stairs will link down to the south end of the subway platform level north of Eglinton Avenue West.  New street entrances will be built on the south north side of Eglinton east and west of Allen Road.

A new upper concourse (half way between street level and the existing subway platform, page 2) will link the new entrances to the new lower concourse.

At subway platform level (page 3), this platform dead ends today, but it will be extended south into new corridors on either side of the subway structure that will fan out into the east and west halves of the LRT lower concourse.  From this level, passengers will go down to the LRT platform (page 4).

The typical paths through the station for access and transfer movements would be:

  • LRT to subway:  Up one level to the lower concourse, then walk north to the subway platform.
  • LRT to bus: Up one level, walk to the subway platform, then up two levels (using the existing escalator) to the bus loop.
  • LRT to street:  Either to the main entrance in the bus loop, or up two levels (one escalator) from the LRT to the upper concourse, and then up one more level to one of the south side entrances.

All of these designs are subject to refinement as they are only at the 5% stage.

About Steve

Steve thanks you for reading this article, even if you don't agree with it.
This entry was posted in Eglinton LRT, Subways, Transit. Bookmark the permalink.
RSS for Comments

30 Responses to Crosstown LRT Interchanges with the Yonge-University-Spadina Subway

  1. Steve any idea how much of the old infrastructure was left after the filling in of the hole in 95? I am guessing it was entirely filled in back in the day but it would be useful if it was not.

    As for Eglinton … correct me if I am wrong but they are shifting the entire platform north? Does that not mean a prolonged closure something the TTC is looking to avoid … it’s not a simple task quite frankly and cannot be done while the subway is operational. It’s not like Sheppard where all you have to do for the most part is knock down a few walls and budda boom longer platform.

    One last note … I presume they will not be connecting to the now derelict Eglinton Ave exit (I believe it was formerly the Duplex exit) now fenced in where the bus bays are once they move the platform?

    Steve: From recent reports, I believe that all that was left from the original Eglinton West subway construction was a short section of box structure that was not of the appropriate size or location to be recycled.

    The platform at Eglinton is not “shifting” north. It is being extended from the north end into space now occupied by a signal room and the entrance to the pocket track (which will be abandoned). In other words, the space is already excavated, but a new platform must be built replacing what is there now. Once the bus operations move to the new loop, the south exit from the platform can be closed, and the platform itself can be walled off as “back of house” space.

    The old Duplex exit will not be reused.

  2. Oh ok thank you for the info Steve. It will be interesting to see if they replace the existing Vitrolite (which is falling off the walls in some spots) or simply place a like material in the extended portion.

    Personally I hope they do what they did at Dundas with the entrance into 10 Dundas east with the glass tiles mimicking what was there when it opened. Its not vitrolite but it is a reasonable facsimile. I can see the TTC using this an excuse to retile the station which is starting to look like a necessity at Subway level.

  3. Michael S says:

    Is the pocket track of little-enough use that the TTC would be willing to abandon it fully, or would they ever consider pushing the specialwork further north to access it? (possibly requiring a northern extension of the end of the track itself) With storage space at a premium, especially on the Yonge side of the line, it seems like a bit of a waste to abandon that pocket track. With a potential expansion of the TR order they may have to start to look at utilizing spaces such as these for storage on an interim basis until they sort out further expansions to Wilson/north Yonge yard.

    Steve: This pocket is used in the AM peak to store a service relief train, but any short-turn moves at Eglinton can be done using the crossover at the south end of the station. Extending the pocket track would be extremely expensive, as would moving the special work to the north end, a change that would leave the pocket pointing the “wrong way”.

  4. James Bow says:

    Thanks for this post, Steve. Fascinating reading, as always.

    I was wondering if you could clarify this: with Eglinton, they’re clearly going to shift the trains north slightly to make use of the extended platform and distribute passengers better. And, clearly, the best option for Eglinton West is to extend the platform level south to access the LRT concourse. What happens to the southern part of the old Eglinton station platform? Does it get walled off and turned into offices?

    Steve: Yes. I suspect one use will be an expanded Operators’ waiting room.

    And will trains shift south on Eglinton West to access the new platform space (possibly walling off the northern part of the platform). Shifting the trains south a bit would bring the LRT station closer to some of the passengers on the train.

    Steve: No. It’s one thing to build a new passageway beside the existing station, another to demolish the existing tunnel wall (which helps to hold up the roof). The problem of a “T” layout for the transfer will remain whether they shorten the walk or not.

    And, I can’t help but notice that we’ve extended the platforms of two stations, making it possible to serve longer trains and increase capacity. Are we looking at two down, thirty-six to go? :-)

    Steve: There will be seven car trainsets with a short middle car long before the stations are extended. One possibility the TTC has mentioned is that when the T1′s are due for retirement, the existing TR sets would move over to BD, and new seven-car sets would take over on YUS.

  5. Robert Wightman says:

    Extend Eglinton platform, I mean move it 70 m north. I can hear it now: “Don’t close the south end, run longer trains and start extending all the platforms where possible and don’t open all the doors where not possible.” There I have gotten idea out into the open everyone now forget it because it is physically and financially impossible and it will require an increase in minimum headway.

    Steve: The other much more fundamental problem is that it is not just a matter of making stations longer. All of the turnbacks, carhouses and other storage areas are based on 450-foot long trains. Even a 500-foot train (sorry to be Imperial here, but the subway was built in those units) is tricky in some spots. More than 500 feet would require massive changes throughout the system, some of which are physically impossible.

  6. Robert Wightman says:

    If people want to make well thought out comments regarding lengthening stations and trains, running shorter headways or the benefits of ATO I suggest that they down load the “Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual, Third Edition” from the Transportation Research Board.

    After they have read that, especially chapter 8, then they can partake of a sane conversation on the factors that affect capacity, especially note the problems with merging services. On page 8-21 (page 26 of 165) in chapter 8 is where I found the statement that ATO will only increase capacity by 2 to 4% because there are many other factors that also limit capacity.

    Increasing train length by 1/3, adding 2 cars, will increase the time to move through the cross over by 1/3, increase the minimum time between trains because longer trains take longer time to clear an area. Every change that is made has a multitude of effects and ALL of them have to be considered.

    So while it may seem that by lengthening trains and increasing speed capacity can be increased, in reality once you pass the “magic length and speed” capacity will actually decrease. Please read the report or at least all of chapter 8 before making any suggestions that are not well thought out.

  7. Andrew says:

    It seems weird that Metrolinx is spending all this money reconfiguring Eglinton station, but not putting Leslie station on the south side of the road or otherwise grade separating that intersection. I recall that putting Leslie on the south side cost somewhat more, but it would be small compared to the cost of Eglinton-Yonge station. The report claims that 10,000 people will be transferring at Eglinton station in 2051, which seems to me a passenger volume that would overwhelm the LRT unless Leslie station is modified and short turn service is added between Don Mills and Mount Dennis. (I assume that most of those people transferring will be coming from the westbound direction and that a substantial portion of the westbound traffic will not transfer at Eglinton-Yonge).

    Obviously we could see these transfer volumes by 2030 or 2040 if ridership if higher than projected. I understand why Metrolinx wants to reconfigure Eglinton station (to avoid creating another Bloor-Yonge) but it seems that these transfer volumes can’t be achieved without the LRT short turn service, and the LRT short turn service is basically useless if it terminates at Laird – if volumes are high enough that LRT short turn service is actually needed but it terminates at Laird, then the Laird-Don Mills section will probably be overcrowded. This is something Metrolinx ought to learn from Edmonton, which is planning to start short turn service on its LRT soon once a new branch to NAIT opens, taking advantage of the fact that the central section of the line between Health Sciences/Jubilee and Churchill (built in the 1970s) is grade separated. Ottawa will eventually do the same thing, as the whole concept is to make the central portions of the line entirely grade separated, but cut the cost of building future branches which will only have 1/2 the frequency of the central section.

    Steve: Although service from the east does carry more passengers into Eglinton Station today, the service from the west is not trivial. Even if 75% is from the east, that represents 7,500 passengers per hour, well within the capability of 3-car trains. Some traffic will flow through, but this will still leave the service well within LRT capabilities. For service design purposes, an LFLRV has a capacity of around 150 giving a 3-car train a planning capacity of 450. A 3 minute headway (20 trains/hour) has a capacity of 9,000, and there is no reason why this headway cannot operate on the surface section of the line from Brentcliffe to Don Mills.

    As for Don Mills itself, by 2051 I think we might reasonably see a mature “Don Mills Subway”. It would be interesting to know whether the model that predicts the demand at Yonge included this feature and its effect on diverting traffic off of the inner part of the Eglinton line.

  8. Sean Boulton says:

    Steve, as my home subway station, it’s interesting seeing the description of how Eglinton Station will be affected.

    It’s particularly interesting to read about the platform being extended north, resulting in the closure of the south entrance. Every developer that’s submitted a condo proposal for south of Eglinton in the last couple of years has used the south entrance as the focal point for showing they’re within walking distance of a subway station. It’ll be nice to have another data point to call them out on how disingenuous they’re being.

    Steve: The northerly shift of the platform is a very recent proposal, and not something that developers would have known about. It becomes an issue now, but they can’t be called out for mentioning it when the station was going to stay put.

  9. Marc says:

    Instead of extending the Eglinton subway platform north to spread out passenger flow, could the same result not be achieved by having vertical access between the LRT mezzanine and the subway platform only in the southern half of the subway platform?

    Steve: This would require a passageway under the existing subway platform from the Lower Mezzanine (the level between the LRT platform and the subway platform). That’s quite an expense to dig considering it is surrounded by the subway on top, and the buildings around the subway below. This is not something where one just digs down and in from the sides. Don’t forget that the south end of the platform is well south of Eglinton and a rather large building that was built long after the subway was already in place sits on top of the station.

  10. W. K. Lis says:

    I sent an e-mail to Metrolinx concerning the Leslie Stop. If they do no move the Leslie Stop and right-of-way on the south side of Eglinton Avenue East, there is another option.

    Move the left turn lanes from eastbound Eglinton to northbound Leslie and the left turn merging lanes from southbound Leslie to eastbound Eglinton to the north side of the right-of-way. Left turn lanes from eastbound Eglinton could occur BEFORE the west portal and stay on the north side of the right-of-way until Leslie. While the merging lanes from southbound Leslie could stay on the north side of the right-of-way until AFTER the east portal. Eastbound Eglinton will only have to face a pedestrian signal at Leslie Street.

  11. DavidAH_Ca says:

    Steve:

    New street entrances will be built on the south side of Eglinton east and west of Allen Road.

    and

    LRT to street: Either to the main entrance in the bus loop, or up two levels (one escalator) from the LRT to the upper concourse, and then up one more level to one of the south side entrances.

    Actually, the plans show that the east and west entrances are located on the north side of Eglinton, specifically in the now closed parking lots.

    Steve: Apologies, you are correct. I will fix the article. Thanks for catching this.

    In fact, this has been a major area of complaint at the various Eglinton West ‘consultations’. While some of the plans have shown potential entrances south of the street, they are almost always noted as potential future entrances. Many of the people who arrive from the south consider this not just an inconvenience but also a safety issue, since the intersection is extremely busy and the crossing is set up to require two stages. Furthermore, it is the only signalized crossing between Marlee Ave. and Flanders Rd., which is annoying for those arriving from the south-east as they need to go west past the station (and presumably past the East entrance when it opens) in order to cross Eglinton to get to the subway.

    On a separate note, concerning the ‘Harris relics’: I believe that Metrolinx is currently removing the piles that were sunk for the proposed station, but are now in exactly the wrong location for the new design.

  12. Tom says:

    For the Eglinton West station, I personally would like to see a connection made between the new upper concourse and the bus terminal, say by putting the turnstiles in the corridors and putting passageways on the north side of the concourse to the bus terminal. With so many people using this transfer point, I’d prefer to have more than only one route through it.

  13. Jos Callinet says:

    Thank you, Steve, for your interesting overview and discussion of the options and challenges facing the designers of this major transit interchange.

    Hanging over your discussion is one overriding – and major – cloud of uncertainty. That uncertainty is embodied in the key word “proposed.” There are tremendously heated political forces currently fixated on ‘subways, and only subways,’ and arrayed against “LRT” in too many politicians’ (and their supporters’) minds. Look at Tim Hudak, whom we can practically count on to exploit to the hilt the negative public attitude toward LRT in any form (including even the Eglinton line, currently under construction) during next year’s likely provincial election. If he becomes Ontario’s premier, he will scuttle all the current LRT plans just as Toronto City Council did, the LRT replacement for the Scarborough RT. This would include all the current Metrolinx projects involving light rail.

    There is great uncertainty about what will happen after Mayor Ford is deposed – IF he is – and what Toronto Council will then be pressured into doing with the transit file.

    It must be extraordinarily hard these days for anyone to seriously plan ahead with any assurance that their plans will actually see the light of day.

    Under present circumstances, Toronto is highly unlikely to get one single foot of genuine light rail built, even on the Eglinton line, which is primarily in subway. There are far too many powerful political forces currently opposing LRT for the concept to be given a chance. It is just about a certainty that the other two currently-planned-for LRTs, Sheppard East and Finch West, will be canceled by whomever happens to be calling the shots, long before any on-the-ground work is started on either one.

    If Hudak is elected next year, he will very likely order the Eglinton line’s unfinished tunnels be (once again!) filled in.

    Planning for transit in Toronto has become such a long shot that no one should reasonably expect that ANY plan, no matter how well-conceived or necessary, will be started, not to mention fully completed and made operational, before yet another politician or group comes along and tears all the hard-earned and -won plans to shreds – and for the umpteenth time demands that we start over. We all have a better chance of winning the Power Ball lottery than of having any worthwhile transit project come to fruition!

    How much more time, money and effort should we invest in transit planning – only to have it all thrown away? I daresay, none!

    Steve: I have to operate on the basis that if Hudak wins, Ontario and Toronto are doomed to far more serious outcomes than just the loss of the LRT plan. The Tories have such a simplistic attitude to finances and services that it is disgusting to think that they call themselves “businessmen”. My concern is that debates continue about what we might do with a Liberal-NDP government at Queen’s Park and a Ford-Free City Hall. We should not have to start from scratch after all the time that Mayor Bozo has cost us.

  14. Nick L says:

    Out of curiosity Steve, would it be practical to rebuild the crossover at Eglinton to reduce the s-curves if the south end of the platform is closed or would that count as a “beyond possible” project?

    Steve: It’s not impossible given that this part of the structure is mainly under Berwick Avenue and the south end of the old garage entrance. However, why we would do this is another matter. Yes, it’s a point where trains have to operate more slowly, but is the fix worth the cost?

  15. OgtheDim says:

    That Starbucks across from the southern Eglinton entrance is DOOMED!!

    Not quite as facetious note:

    I’m wondering why inconvenience people, if only 10 metres by moving the entrance out of the current south west corner. Can’t be kept? Is the current entrance at the corner just not feasible with a track entrance or is it just a matter of getting things up to code? I know its a minor thing, but people do like to whine. I know, I have little sympathy for that extra walk but people will ask why, when something is already there, spend the money for a newer entrance.

    Steve: I think that what is going on here is that three of the four corners will be redeveloped. The NE corner already has a proposal, the SE corner is inevitable given the age of the buildings, and the SW corner just has that small BMO stub on a larger building. The new entrance would allow the BMO site to redevelop and become part of whatever will go over the new bus terminal and incorporate the new entrance, and possibly the old entrance as well.

  16. Nick L says:

    Steve said:

    It’s not impossible given that this part of the structure is mainly under Berwick Avenue and the south end of the old garage entrance. However, why we would do this is another matter. Yes, it’s a point where trains have to operate more slowly, but is the fix worth the cost?

    Well, I was actually thinking in terms of reducing equipment wear rather than speed; although increased speed would be a side effect of limited benefit. However, you illustrated the reason why I used the word “practical” rather than exclusively using possible.

  17. Joshua Tossavainen says:

    @Jos

    The political backlash from filling in Eglinton twice would be so intense that I doubt the Conservatives would flat out cancel it a second time.

    I sent an email to Jeff Yurek asking what would happen to the Viva Next project if the Conservatives were elected. I was told that although the Conservatives plan on focusing exclusively on underground transit, they would honour the contracts for any projects that were currently under construction.

    I think it’s a fairly safe bet that if the Viva Next projects are going to be finished the Eglinton Line will be finished too. I doubt that the Sheppard or Finch West LRT would survive though.

    Steve: The key issue is how they interpret “contracts”. There is still plenty of time to kill off the Eglinton LRT and repurpose it as a subway line because contracts have not been let for the entire line. Thank you Dalton McGuinty and your damned foot-dragging. Between him and Rob Ford, they have done a huge amount of damage to transit plans simply by preventing projects from starting.

  18. M. Briganti says:

    Fifty weekend closures?! Do you remember if they closed the Yonge line that many times when Bloor was being built underneath?

    Steve: Considering that they are only at 5% design, I suspect someone just said “give us a year’s worth” and let it go at that for now.

  19. Andrew says:

    Steve: Although service from the east does carry more passengers into Eglinton Station today, the service from the west is not trivial. Even if 75% is from the east, that represents 7,500 passengers per hour, well within the capability of 3-car trains.

    It seems unlikely that 7500 out of a maximum 9000 passengers going west in the AM peak would be transferring to the Yonge line. Many passengers would be transferring at Allen or going to the airport area or going somewhere else.

    My understanding is that the idea when the Don Mills-Brentcliffe segment was proposed to be underground was to run 3 minutes on the surface section, and 1.5 minutes on the underground section in the future. Though 3 minutes seems aggressive for a surface light rail line, and suggests that the signal priority system won’t be very good, and I’m not sure how easy it would be to run such a short turn service reliably. For comparison, Edmonton runs every 5 minutes at rush hour on the above ground sections, and has basically 100% signal priority.

    Eglinton would have much higher capacity if it were fully grade separated, or at least grade separated west of Don Mills. With 3-car LRT trains or 4-car subway trains and ATO on 90 second headways you can carry about 20000 people/hour. Then capacity is unlikely to be a problem, as the line can carry more people than Highway 401 (around 14000/hour).

  20. Pierce says:

    There is no question that the LRT will add to the overcrowding of the Eglinton subway station.

    The only real solution is the Relief Line being extended up Don Mills Road, so that the downtown bound traffic will be diverted from the LRT. In fact, if there are not too many intermediate stations south of Danforth, it might be quite a bit faster for Eglinton passengers to head east from, say Bayview, to take the Relief Line instead of the Yonge Line.

    If the Relief Line is extended up to Eglinton, they will have to dig a station under the underground Don Mills LRT station. Maybe they could do that when the LRT is being built, rather than disrupt that station in 10 or so years when they finally start work on the Relief Line.

  21. Steve: The key issue is how they interpret “contracts”. There is still plenty of time to kill off the Eglinton LRT and repurpose it as a subway line because contracts have not been let for the entire line.

    Perhaps a reason why the recent announcement about tunneling the next segment of the line also featured a prominent rendering of the Brentcliffe portal.

    Hopefully this means there is an effort to preserve the Crosstown as an LRT (because it cannot become a subway with this portal) … and I don’t think anyone dares to reopen the discussion now.

    By the way, knowing the challenges faced with shoehorning a subway interchange into a built-up area … and learning from the lessons of Yonge-Bloor, Yonge-Sheppard and now Yonge-Eglinton … do you think we will get to a point when cross-stations are roughed in (as TTC did with Queen at its most basic level) to make construction easier in the future? I know it’s not easy to predict every future line and interchange but if there was ever a reason to have a plan in advance, this would be it.

    Cheers, Moaz

    Steve: At Don Mills and Eglinton, there should definitely be consideration of prebuilding a short chunk of tunnel for a north-south station. This was not included in the original EA for the Crosstown because it assumed a surface station for a Don Mills LRT. Given the priority Metrolinx assigns to the “DRL”, they need to incorporate this in the Eglinton/Don Mills station design.

  22. J. Routh says:

    On page 2 of 4 of Appendix A it shows the upper concourse level of the Eglinton West Station. A corridor linking the east and west entrances is labelled ‘unpaid corridor’. What does that mean?

    Steve: The Upper Concourse links the two new entrances to a single fare barrier at the station itself. Once inside this barrier, it is possible to descend to the Lower Concourse from which one can either walk north to the trains, or down to the LRT.

  23. ADifferentMichaelS says:

    I’m a little confused about the southernmost stairwell for Eglinton station – you said it will be reconfigured as it will be near the end of the platform. However, it’s already near the end of the platform. Won’t it become completely irrelevant once the station box moves as far north as this diagram suggests? Or will the platform simply become extraordinarily long, with the train only taking up a small portion of it?

    Steve: Sorry, I meant the southernmost of the exits to the existing north mezzanine (the one where the escalator normally runs “down”). The exit at the very south end that is only a stairway goes to the current bus loop (which won’t be needed any more) and it will be beyond the south end of the relocated platform.

  24. Robert Wightman says:

    After riding many Metro Systems I can say that the TTC’s interchange stations are models of efficiency, many times I have walked 3 blocks underground to make a “simple connection”. Changing from Bloor Danforth to Spadina at Spadina Station would be a short connection. Most were more like changing from a GO train at Union to Yonge by following PATH to King. Toronto has more than its share of problems but it does do some things very well.

  25. ADifferentMichaelS says:

    Ah, that makes more sense… I’m trying to place the ‘new’ entrance of the station then. Looks like it’s north of the existing one in Canada Square and inside the Mandarin?

    Steve: The new entrance is at the northeast corner of the old bus loop just west of the BMO on the south side of Eglinton.

  26. nfitz says:

    Good article Steve. I’ve been meaning to try and comprehend the various drawings and documents, but haven’t had the time, so I really appreciate the digest.

    The end product at Eglinton, troubles me. Not only are we only going to have a centre platform for the subway, which already seems very busy at times, we are also going to have to have space for staircases down, not just up.

    Without looking at the physical constraints … wouldn’t be sensible to add a second, and perhaps third platform? Or at least protect for doing so in the future (like they did at the old Sheppard platform at Sheppard-Yonge station).

    I’m concerned that we’re going to create another Yonge-Bloor. Moving the platform helps, but does it help enough?

    Steve: It is not possible to add platforms outside of the subway structure because it is physically surrounded by the building on top of it.

  27. nfitz says:

    Steve:

    It is not possible to add platforms outside of the subway structure because it is physically surrounded by the building on top of it.

    That’s unfortunate. Had they built Eglinton in the same manner as every other station on Yonge Street, we’d have been better served now. Poor planning that they didn’t protect space for at least one more platform years ago.

    Are you sure? Looking at the figures in the report you referenced, it appears that to the east of the existing tunnel and platforms is Yonge Street. It’s not immediately obvious to me why a platform, possibly partially staggered, couldn’t go here.

    Steve: When Eglinton Station was built, there was only a small kiosk on the SW corner as an entrance building (where the BMO is today). The building just to the south was built over the subway structure decades after the station opened. You have to remember that at the time, North Toronto was pretty much the end of the city. I grew up east of Mt. Pleasant, and you didn’t have to go far north to hit farmland in the mid 50s. Leaside was brand new. It’s all very well at a distance of about 70 years saying that back in the 40s when the subway was planned, they should have made room for expansion. The city’s population explosion was only just beginning at that point.

    As for staggering the platforms, the problem is that there is limit to how far north the platform could be shifted based on two factors: the transition to bored from box tunnel structure and the curve as the line straightens out under Yonge Street. While the platform may be near Yonge, it is not at Yonge and the foundation of the office tower goes down east of the subway structure.

  28. nfitz says:

    Steve:

    As for staggering the platforms, the problem is that there is limit to how far north the platform could be shifted based on two factors: the transition to bored from box tunnel structure and the curve as the line straightens out under Yonge Street. While the platform may be near Yonge, it is not at Yonge and the foundation of the office tower goes down east of the subway structure.

    The foundation is east of the Yonge subway line. Oh my … that’s an issue. I guess you’d have to move a platform go all the way north. Is there a good map somewhere that shows where the line and curves really are?

    Or perhaps divert the northbound tunnel entirely somewhere south of Berwick, and bring it right to the centre of Yonge, and build a completely new station in the centre of Yonge for only the northbound platform. Sounds extreme, but it’s probably similar and less extreme (certainly shallower construction) than what London Underground is planning to do with the southbound Northern line at Bank Station. Though this is also something that could be constructed in the future, if Eglinton become non-functional. I suppose asking that they do something properly now is an unreasonable expectation.

    Hmm, I wonder if the solution for the Davisville track would be to simply move the line to under Yonge Street.

    … gosh, I’m so far out of the box this morning that I must be on crack.

    Steve: This discussion is getting beyond fanciful. I tire of pointing out obvious structural issues such as the physical location of lines or constructability issues such as grades, utilities and existing buildings. Any further comments on this subject will be deleted.

  29. Robert Wightman says:

    nfitz says:

    November 21, 2013 at 10:22 am

    “The foundation is east of the Yonge subway line. Oh my … that’s an issue. I guess you’d have to move a platform go all the way north. Is there a good map somewhere that shows where the line and curves really are?

    “Or perhaps divert the northbound tunnel entirely somewhere south of Berwick, and bring it right to the centre of Yonge, and build a completely new station in the centre of Yonge for only the northbound platform. Sounds extreme, but it’s probably similar and less extreme (certainly shallower construction) than what London Underground is planning to do with the southbound Northern line at Bank Station. Though this is also something that could be constructed in the future, if Eglinton become non-functional. I suppose asking that they do something properly now is an unreasonable expectation.

    “Hmm, I wonder if the solution for the Davisville track would be to simply move the line to under Yonge Street.

    “… gosh, I’m so far out of the box this morning that I must be on crack.”

    Nov. 20 2013

    “That’s unfortunate. Had they built Eglinton in the same manner as every other station on Yonge Street, we’d have been better served now. Poor planning that they didn’t protect space for at least one more platform years ago.”

    I don’t know about crack but you must be on something that removes all traces of reality from you brain. Some questions for you to ponder before your come out with any other crazy ideas:

    1. How long will the subway be shut down for this maintenance? best guess 4 – 6 weeks. For this you would build a new subway station or move the northbound platform under Yonge. How many YEARS do you think that would take? HINT it is longer than 6 weeks.

    2. Who gives a **** what London would do at Bank Station on the Northern Line, Toronto’s problem(s) is (are) a lot different, let’s deal with Toronto’s, and not London’s problem(s).

    3. How would you put the platform at Davisville under Yonge St? North of Lawton Blvd. the line is above grade level. You would need to drop the level of the track farther south, probably south of St. Clair Station in order to go under Yonge at Davisville. Have you ever walked by the Subway south of Davisville? If you had you might have noticed that the track is above street level. Don’t blame someone else for pointing out FACTS such as Eglinton Station is surrounded by buildings. Sorry that facts get in the road of YOUR reality.

    4. You state that it is unfortunate that they didn’t build Eglinton in the same manner as all other Yonge stations. What do you mean by this, centre vs side platform? Side platform for line stations and centre platform for terminal stations was common in 1945 to 1950 when these stations were designed. The entire population of Toronto was under 1,000,000 when the subway was approved, Canada was barely 12,000,000 at the end of WWII. Who could have foreseen the growth back then.

    5. Remember that when you point one accusatory finger at others, three point back at yourself.

    The Roman Catholic Church had (has?) a position called the Devil’s Advocate. This person’s job was to find every reason why someone should not be considered for sainthood so that there would be no surprises. It behooves everyone who puts forth a suggestion to carefully consider the realities of what they are proposing, and to walk the area. Being the Devil’s Advocate is not being a spoiler but making sure that any proposal is reasonable.

    There Steve, I bet you never thought that I would be referencing the Catholic Church in one of your comments because I never could have imagined it.

  30. W. K. Lis says:

    What plans do they have for the Don Mills station to transfer to whatever-if-maybe-cound-be a Don Mills Relief Line? None? Will it then become another Bloor-Yonge, Egltinton-Yonge, Eglinton West-Spadina transfer? I hope not,

    There is vast areas/hectares of parking lots at the Eglinton East-Don Mills intersection. The Crosstown LRT will be going underground at that point. Why doesn’t it veer off from under the roadways, and go under the parking lots to make for a station diagonal to the intersection. They should provide station boxes that can accommodate both heavy rail or light rail, and when the decision is made, then make the adjustments as needed.

    The Don Mills Station for the Crosstown LRT should be more like the Lionel-Groulx station in the Montréal Metro.

    Steve: The curves you ask for will take up a fair amount of room to get the two lines side-by-side. I would be happier just to see a design for Don Mills Station that acknowledges another underground line. The current proposal shows an Eglinton line station centred on Don Mills, but no provision for a second line passing under it.

Comments are closed.