Save Union Station

Bulletin

SAVE UNION STATION - Bulletin No. 28, December 16, 2004.

On December l, City Council made what can be considered to be its final substantive decisions about the redevelopment of Union Station.

These decisions were in respect to the Master Plan that had been drafted by city staff, publicly criticized, and subjected to a peer review by consultants Office for Urbanism, R.E. Millward & Associates, and Poulis & Chung Ltd. The Union Station Master Plan they prepared was considered by City Council on December 1.

Some heralded this Master Plan as a visionary new document, but Save Union Station criticized it as dealing with everything but the guts of the station. As drafted, the Master Plan has nothing to say about changes to the tracks, the platforms or the roof on the bizarre assumption that since these parts of the Station are under the control of GO-Transit, then neither the City nor its consultants should be seriously talking about them. After our committee met with them and others, the consultants proposed that if the opportunity arose, then a new shed should be built sooner rather than later.

Our group submitted a short booklet filled with photos to Council. The booklet argued that train stations in the big North-American cities have been renovated or are in the process of renovation - two stations in Chicago, two stations in New York, and one in each of Washington, Philadelphia and Boston - and Toronto should have the smarts to renovate Union Station just like those other place. The booklet also showed photos of the extraordinary designs for new train stations in Europe where enormous investments are being made in attractive stations and high speed rail.

We noted that the Master Plan does not require a new roof, or comfortably wide platforms, or escalators. It does not suggest improvements to encourage more inter-city rail, mid or high-speed trains. We proposed that the Master Plan be changed to ensure that these objectives were met in the near term.

Sadly, City Council was not up to the task. The debate lasted for about six hours and while there were several interesting motions that were passed, there were no major amendments to the Master Plan requiring Union Pearson to improve the tracks, the platforms or the roof.

The motion that came closest to talking about big change was proposed by Councillor Pam McConnell (who has always been willing to take a strong position on Union Station.) Her motion asked that GO Transit "increase the number of escalators and elevators in Union Station in order to properly access trains, and ensure that the shed renovation is completed within a five year time frame." The motion passed with only Councillor Rob Ford objecting. He has consistently opposed this redevelopment because he believes the whole process was flawed.

But McConnell's motion does not change the Master Plan - it is a request to GO-Transit. GO Transit's position in these matters is firm: it does not think investments in escalators is a good way to spend money, and it does not believe that creating an attractive roof over the tracks is an important investment.

Councillor Joe Pantalone asked that a report come forward in February about creating an inter-city bus terminal, presumably close to Union Station. Why this matter was introduced at this point is anyone's guess - it has been talked about for the past few years without any councillor showing the least bit of interest even though several plans had been proposed to incorporate a bus terminal into the Station.

Councillor Howard Moscoe asked for a report on how to integrate taxis into the fabric of Union Station. Again this was something that was urged on Council during the past two years without success. The Master Plan proposed that the travelers find taxis on a newly designed and pedestrian-friendly Front Street.

The most interesting motion proposed was defeated by a vote of 16 to 24. It was moved by Councillor Raymond Cho who asked for a report in the next six months on the specific designs for the station and who will be responsible for each aspect of the project and its financing. He went on, "The Union Pearson Group be requested to provide a video presentation … of the Tokyo station and one example each of the best station in Europe and the United States."

The video would have shown the initiatives being taken by leaders in other cities and contrasted them with the somnambulant bunch here in Toronto. Perhaps that's the reason why the Mayor and other leading members of Council opposed it so strongly.

Mayor David Miller was the last speaker at Council and he concluded by saying, "We finally got it right."

According to the agreement already signed with city council, Union Pearson must confirm its agreement with the Master Plan. Once this is done (it is considered only a formality) the 100 year term begins to run. Union Pearson will begin to take possession of the station and carry out its plan. The plan consists of building a new west concourse for GO Transit so there will be two concourses, each filled with two-dozen staircases to the track platforms, and a new food court created at a level below the current waiting area for VIA trains. The west wing of Union Station contains about 100,000 square feet of space that could be used for office, residential or hotel purposes. It will be fixed up, as will retail space throughout the Station, and Union Pearson will begin paying the city $500,000 in annual rent for the whole shebang. (Most developers would have been willing to plunk down $30 per square foot or more for the west wing, producing a minimum of $3 million a year for the city, but our city council settled for far less for the whole Station.)

The Great Hall will be carefully restored, but since the designs keep GO riders in the cellar, very few will experience this marvelous space. The Great Hall will become the Lost Hall, waiting to be discovered by chance by tourists wandering the downtown.

In all likelihood the next chance to tackle the revitalization of the guts of the station will come when there are decisions about building over the tracks. That probably won't begin in earnest until there is a better market for office space downtown, and that may be several decades away. In the interim, the existing track and platforms and roof will remain as is, and GO riders will be pleased to tramp up and down the 41 steps between concourse and platform.

Ironically, the day before these final approvals were given, City Council approved a reorganization of staff which eliminates the positions now held by Paula Dill, Commissioner of Urban Development Services, and Joan Anderton, Commissioner of Corporate Services. As reported in our Bulletins, it was the very contentious actions taken by these two individuals which resulted in the bid going to the Union Pearson Group. It now seems most unlikely they will be in the city's employ past next April, but the residents of Toronto will be stuck with their actions for the next 100 years.

Barring unforeseen activities - and the saga of Union Station has had more than its share of the unforeseen - the future of Union Station appears to be set for the next 100 years, and the opportunities for members of the public to have any substantive influence on the Station's future appears at an end. Accordingly, we expect this to be the final Bulletin of the Save Union Station Committee.

Thanks for your interest and support. It's a pity the public interest was given such short shrift during the past three years.

***

Our Email address is signup@saveunionstation.ca and please visit our website at http://www.saveunionstation.ca