TOtramz said:
I am genuinely concerned that by the time the train reaches around Finch or Sheppard, there will be no more room for Toronto passengers to board.
Click to expand...
Aren't they planning to turn back every 2nd or 3rd train at Finch (as they did at Eglinton for a few years when Yonge was extended to Finch), or is that plan dead?
 
I have question that I imagine has been answered before in another thread, but anyway, how difficult is it to add a station to an existing subway line? Is it feasible or is it very difficult?

Thanks
 
kamira51 said:
I have question that I imagine has been answered before in another thread, but anyway, how difficult is it to add a station to an existing subway line? Is it feasible or is it very difficult?

Thanks
Click to expand...
That's what they did with North York Centre, but I'm pretty sure the provisions were put in place when the subway was originally extended to Finch.
 
The only argument for the concept of fill-in stations in itself is cost (i.e. no money to build it right away, but money becomes available in the future). Other than that, it sounds monumentally stupid to not simply build a station at X location from the get-go if you know you'll most likely be inserting it in that location in the future anyway.

Funny enough, this issue is most prominent on the subway (NYCC & Cummer being the best examples), but on GO it's merely an afterthought, as indeed Downsview Park is a fill-in station that essentially replaced YorkU, and more fill-in stations are expected in the future (i.e. between Danforth & Union) that were probably never even thought of (correct me if I'm wrong) when the line(s) first opened.
 
81-717 said:
The only argument for the concept of fill-in stations in itself is cost (i.e. no money to build it right away, but money becomes available in the future). Other than that, it sounds monumentally stupid to not simply build a station at X location from the get-go if you know you'll most likely be inserting it in that location in the future anyway.
Click to expand...
Cost is not just of building, but also of maintaining the structure and everything inside (and potentially above) it. Which, with a station, is far more substantial than just a "simple" tunnel.

Dan
 
81-717 said:
Funny enough, this issue is most prominent on the subway (NYCC & Cummer being the best examples), but on GO it's merely an afterthought, as indeed Downsview Park is a fill-in station that essentially replaced YorkU, and more fill-in stations are expected in the future (i.e. between Danforth & Union) that were probably never even thought of (correct me if I'm wrong) when the line(s) first opened.
Click to expand...
Well, yes, because when your stations are just concrete slabs, it's a lot easier to build an infill one, then it is in a tunnel.
 
GenerationW said:
Aren't they planning to turn back every 2nd or 3rd train at Finch (as they did at Eglinton for a few years when Yonge was extended to Finch), or is that plan dead?
Click to expand...

This was talked about at some point but I doubt it'll happen, especially since York Region is now a funding partner.

In answer to the questions of when this thing will actually open, Michael Lindsay basically didn't provide any years but made clear it can't open until after Ontario Line. So I guess you can do the math there but they won't be providing anything resembling a finishing date until after OL has one and until after they have the other P3 partner on. So we're probably 3-5 years from even having a good guess.

The only thing that is certain is that Ford's 2031 date won't happen.
 
This line has been behind the other three for a while and for clear reasons. Metrolinx is running it 2-3 years behind the other three - and I suspect it will open 2-3 years later as well.

Generally I expect the OL, Scarborough Subway, and Eglinton West to open in the 2031-2033 range, with this one opening closer to 2035.

Scarborough is already seeing issues and delays though so it may be a bit behind.
 
T3G said:
Well, yes, because when your stations are just concrete slabs, it's a lot easier to build an infill one, then it is in a tunnel.
Click to expand...
That's why i said it's far from ideal to do an in-fill station within a tunnel after the line is already built, especially if the decision to build said station in the future was already made in advance when the line was being built.
 
Please tell me the terminal station isn’t named “High Tech” station?

Ontario really needs a lesson on naming conventions because my goodness some of the names they come up with for public spaces/stations etc. are just cringeworthy.

TF is High Tech?
 
6ixGod said:
Please tell me the terminal station isn’t named “High Tech” station?

Ontario really needs a lesson on naming conventions because my goodness some of the names they come up with for public spaces/stations etc. are just cringeworthy.

TF is High Tech?
Click to expand...
It's most likely a place holder name like "Queen-Spadina", and "King-Bathurst" on the Ontario Line. If I had to guess the final name for the station it will almost certainly be "Richmond Hill Centre". Honestly they should probably also move Langstaff GO north to the subway stop to create a better transfer between the subway and bus terminal (and rename the station of course). Also the name High Tech comes from High Tech Road which is the street the stop will be located at.
 
JSF-1 said:
It's most likely a place holder name like "Queen-Spadina", and "King-Bathurst" on the Ontario Line. If I had to guess the final name for the station it will almost certainly be "Richmond Hill Centre". Honestly they should probably also move Langstaff GO north to the subway stop to create a better transfer between the subway and bus terminal (and rename the station of course). Also the name High Tech comes from High Tech Road which is the street the stop will be located at.
Click to expand...

I hope you’re right that it’s a placeholder, but then again that’s how we ended up with “Vaughan Metropolitan Centre”, because Vaughan is apparently a bustling North American metropolis.

Naming the station “High Tech” after a road just highlights the problem of naming conventions across North America. It’s generic and meaningless…the road itself shouldn’t even be named this let alone the station.

I do agree….they should just create a junction station here….GO, TTC, VIVA/YRT….Langstaff, “High Tech” all into the one large Richmond Hill Centre station, which is what YRT/VIVA already calls it.

Thing is a station name should help people immediately recognise where they are, connect to the local community, or have some historical or cultural significance. Picking an already poor bland street name like this doesn’t do that.

It will be interesting to see what they choose.
 
6ixGod said:
Please tell me the terminal station isn’t named “High Tech” station?

Ontario really needs a lesson on naming conventions because my goodness some of the names they come up with for public spaces/stations etc. are just cringeworthy.

TF is High Tech?
Click to expand...
It's the name of the street where the station is - High Tech Road.

There is a Service Canada there
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top