King-Victoria Transit Hub

[plam]

Having used various transit systems, I worry a lot about Waterloo Street becoming an overpass. With people rushing to get to transit, if they have to ascend by 1-4 levels to get over the tracks and any potential HSR/electrification, and then descend that same height plus more (all non-GO/VIA transit will be below the height of Waterloo Street), it would be exhausting, present a lot of running on stairs, and create long delays and risks of injury. I recognize that some would be romanced by the idea of the overpass as a spot to take photos, but if this is meant as a commuter connection, it makes little sense to go for an overpass.

Swiss train stations seem to have a fairly standard design where even fairly minor stations have more than 3 tracks. So you need overpasses/underpasses for them anyway. For smaller stations they will usually have underpasses, with both ramps and stairs as options. Bigger stations usually have overpasses with retail on the upper floors.

[KevinL]

The tradeoff to going with the highest-density development is ensuring it will bring tenants, which is what will ensure a developer signs on. If it's too much space at once, we may end up waiting longer than we'd like for the site to get fully developed.

[panamaniac]

Having used various transit systems, I worry a lot about Waterloo Street becoming an overpass. With people rushing to get to transit, if they have to ascend by 1-4 levels to get over the tracks and any potential HSR/electrification, and then descend that same height plus more (all non-GO/VIA transit will be below the height of Waterloo Street), it would be exhausting, present a lot of running on stairs, and create long delays and risks of injury. I recognize that some would be romanced by the idea of the overpass as a spot to take photos, but if this is meant as a commuter connection, it makes little sense to go for an overpass.

Swiss train stations seem to have a fairly standard design where even fairly minor stations have more than 3 tracks. So you need overpasses/underpasses for them anyway. For smaller stations they will usually have underpasses, with both ramps and stairs as options. Bigger stations usually have overpasses with retail on the upper floors.

The overpass concept that I saw at Regional HQ today showed what I thought was a ramp only.  I seemed the best way to go, imho, but there was an "all knowing" citizen buttonholing Region staff to know why the ramp option/Waterloo St did not conform to "mandatory design standards".  Said "all knowing" citizen seemed both exasperated and very pleased with himself that the Region staffer had no idea what he was talking about.  Joys of public consultations.....

[Pheidippides]

It may not be a lack of developers that delay the project, but other government support.

"Regional council has decided to proceed with project construction only with the receipt of senior government funding."

[tomh009]

The presentation is well done. We'll have to see which developer steps up and what they are willing to do. It can be almost guaranteed that the site will be developed in phases, though: it's too much to build, and too much to lease out (or sell as condos) all at once.

[KevinL]

Swiss train stations seem to have a fairly standard design where even fairly minor stations have more than 3 tracks. So you need overpasses/underpasses for them anyway. For smaller stations they will usually have underpasses, with both ramps and stairs as options. Bigger stations usually have overpasses with retail on the upper floors.

The overpass concept that I saw at Regional HQ today showed what I thought was a ramp only.  I seemed the best way to go, imho, but there was an "all knowing" citizen buttonholing Region staff to know why the ramp option/Waterloo St did not conform to "mandatory design standards".  Said "all knowing" citizen seemed both exasperated and very pleased with himself that the Region staffer had no idea what he was talking about.  Joys of public consultations.....

There are two separate overpass options, one with a ramp and another with stairs and an elevator. Those two along with the underpass option are the three under consideration.

[panamaniac]

The overpass concept that I saw at Regional HQ today showed what I thought was a ramp only.  I seemed the best way to go, imho, but there was an "all knowing" citizen buttonholing Region staff to know why the ramp option/Waterloo St did not conform to "mandatory design standards".  Said "all knowing" citizen seemed both exasperated and very pleased with himself that the Region staffer had no idea what he was talking about.  Joys of public consultations.....

There are two separate overpass options, one with a ramp and another with stairs and an elevator. Those two along with the underpass option are the three under consideration.

Yes.  I thought the ramp option to be the best one, although there were a couple of concerns noted.  One of them was high cost of construction and maintenance, which I didn't understand.  The other was possible encroachment on one of the transformer boxes, which seemed pretty small potatoes.  It was that option that the concerned citizen was saying did not meet whatever mandatory design features he was concerned with.

[Viewfromthe42]

I'm curious what proponents of overpasses think of the height issue. Imagine you are on Waterloo, and treat this as if it were floor 1 of a building. intercity buses and ION are 1-2 floors below you, on either B1 or B2. To get over top of a GO train, you will need to go up to either floor 3 or 4 of a building. So an overpass would see you walk up the equivalent of 4 flights of stairs, and then down 6 flights of stairs to get to ION/GRT/intercity buses, so 10 flights of stairs used for the most time-sensitive use. An underpass would need to go down 1-2 floors to get under the tracks, meaning you would use 2 flights of stairs to wind up more quickly (and less exhausted) on your desired floor.

[panamaniac]

I'm curious what proponents of overpasses think of the height issue. Imagine you are on Waterloo, and treat this as if it were floor 1 of a building. intercity buses and ION are 1-2 floors below you, on either B1 or B2. To get over top of a GO train, you will need to go up to either floor 3 or 4 of a building. So an overpass would see you walk up the equivalent of 4 flights of stairs, and then down 6 flights of stairs to get to ION/GRT/intercity buses, so 10 flights of stairs used for the most time-sensitive use. An underpass would need to go down 1-2 floors to get under the tracks, meaning you would use 2 flights of stairs to wind up more quickly (and less exhausted) on your desired floor.

As I understand it, there is an overpass option with stairs/elevator, and an overpass option that would be ramp only (and, I assume, escalators/elevator inside the terminal).  The absence of stairs was its strongest point, it seemed to me.

[Canard]

I kind of got from the meeting last night that the only technically possible solution was overpass, stairs + elevator. The ramp blocks the truck access to the loading dock and the underpass can't be designed to the right width because of existing structures and underground utilities. It really felt like they had already made the decision to go with the overpass/stairs/elevator solution, because the other options weren't really possible, given the constraints.

[MidTowner]

I'm curious what proponents of overpasses think of the height issue. Imagine you are on Waterloo, and treat this as if it were floor 1 of a building. intercity buses and ION are 1-2 floors below you, on either B1 or B2. To get over top of a GO train, you will need to go up to either floor 3 or 4 of a building. So an overpass would see you walk up the equivalent of 4 flights of stairs, and then down 6 flights of stairs to get to ION/GRT/intercity buses, so 10 flights of stairs used for the most time-sensitive use. An underpass would need to go down 1-2 floors to get under the tracks, meaning you would use 2 flights of stairs to wind up more quickly (and less exhausted) on your desired floor.

I think this is the right logic to use. The platforms are lower than the north side of Waterloo, so it doesn’t make sense to have people walk up a flight and then down two. We’re talking about people trying to catch a train here; the connection needs to be as quick as possible.

It needs to be comfortable, too, and the underpass would be, quite naturally, covered. If it’s an overpass, it should be enclosed. People in a hurry (who we want to take transit) shouldn’t be asked to climb up and down stairs exposed to the elements in August or January.

[Viewfromthe42]

They might be leaning that way, but unless the utilities are pinching the maximum underpass down to 4m of width for a very long length (unlikely), it would mean that you could have a 6m-wide underpass for all but a short 4m-wide segment. All of that beats turning 2 flights of stairs into 10, speaking as someone who's experienced that king of stair-dilemma in daily commutes for years.

[tomh009]

4m really isn't that narrow. Lots of underpasses or pedestrian tunnels in Tokyo are 4m or less, and they get way more pedestrian traffic than we ever will.

[Canard]

It is exactly the problem - 4m is the widest the underpass would go. I didn't see the slide by my other half pointed out on our way home that it can't be the full 6m required because of the utility issue - which basically eliminated the underpass from being a possibility.

While Tokyo may say 4m is fine, here I guess there is a 6m minimum requirement.

[MidTowner]

It is exactly the problem - 4m is the widest the underpass would go. I didn't see the slide by my other half pointed out on our way home that it can't be the full 6m required because of the utility issue - which basically eliminated the underpass from being a possibility.

While Tokyo may say 4m is fine, here I guess there is a 6m minimum requirement.

It wasn't eliminated from being a possibility, though, it's one of the options being considered. And six metres is not a "requirement," it's a "recommendation" by Metrolinx according to the information.

How long would the underpass be? Four metres, or more than 13 feet, does not seem particularly narrow to me, either.