[M II A II R II K]

The fact that the extension is there would draw large numbers of people to it, particularly to the terminus station.

 

[taal]

I'm not thinking of it in the same light as you do.

The point about the traffic is valid though hence an extension to Steeles and Yonge does make sense to me. The 60 / 53 + (Cummer / Drewry ridership together are probably (27 + 20 + 3 + 7) So that's about 55K. I'd guess YRT brings around 25K Tops (probably closer to 20 for trips that end at Finch) another 5K from everyone else? So let's call that 30K ... a grand total of 85K at Finch.

So fine - extent it to Steeles. Regarding this potential for future growth that's swell but what about other locations in the GTA that already have the demand but no service. Why spend the billions neccasary on something we can build far into the future.

There's a lot of talk about potential for future growth and as I said before if money wasn't an issue that's great but let's meet the current demand first!

Side Note:
Some interesting YRT stats here:
http://www.yrt.ca/whats-ahead/Draft_Plan09_Final_1.pdf

You can see one of their bring problems is a lot of routes with very low Revenue / Cost-ratio. Hence the need for a lot of subsidy.
The TTC has a similar but older document here:
http://www.toronto.ca/ttc/pdf/ridership_cost_stats_bus_streetcar_05_06.pdf

You can see we have some bad routes as well but overall the picture is a lot nicer.

Interestingly it seems ridership is down in the first few months of 2008 for the YRT:
http://yrt.ca/whats-ahead/2008_May_Ridership_Summary_Spec.pdf

 

[Voltz]

That extension won't look so useful when there is all day go service running right beside it

Factoring in the improved Go service, I believe that they should also look at building the subway to Steeles, and LRT to Major Mac and along Highway 7. Automatically assuming that a subway is necessary is how we did things 20 years ago.

 

[taal]

YRT ridership on buses coming into Finch subway was about 40,000 in 2006, not counting other transit services (why not?), and notwithstanding the double fare which significantly reduces ridership in the densest southern areas. Southern York Region has continued to grow and to plan growth significantly since that time, including denser development to come such as -- adjacent to the Yonge extension -- the muilti-building developments at the Hy & Zels Plaza, Thornhill Town Centre/Promenade, and Bunker.

I'd like to see where you got this 40K figure ... From the stats you see in link I provided (which are a lot more recent mind you) there is no way that is possible ... not even close.

Anyway, if you can make an argument that it's somehow cheaper to build it to Hi-way 7 now as opposed to Steeles and maybe 10 / 15 / 20 years from now extent it to Hi-way 7 i.e. we'll save a significant ammount of money then by all means. I'm sure something will be saved by doing it in one shot but is it enough to justify it.

 

[taal]

A few other comments ...

This is really frustrating me because of the extension into Vaughn so that might explain some of my backlash. Lets see:
Keele north = 3000, Jane North = 1500. Please name any other routes you think may not be needed after such an extension. I just can't think of any possible reason. Even if all the future development to take place arleady existed!!

I'd take the Yonge expansion a million times over the one to VCC. But they both seem to be a result of the political notion of making everyone happy just a little bit and not providing good transit.

 

[DavidH]

A few other comments ...
I'd take the Yonge expansion a million times over the one to VCC. But they both seem to be a result of the political notion of making everyone happy just a little bit and not providing good transit.

You can really see the horsetrading in these articles.
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/...dress-population-growth-regional-leaders.aspx
http://www.torontosun.com/news/torontoandgta/2008/09/24/6858766-sun.html

I have no idea what Roger Anderson of Durham is on about, though. He wants the 407 extension - it's in the plan. He wants a route along Steeles/Taunton - it's in the plan. He wants service to north Pickering (Seaton) - it's in the plan both as GO service and as "rapid transit" to the south. Granted a line along highway 7 is not in the plan, but it's hard to see the need there any time soon. On top of that, there is Express Rail along the lakeshore, an extension to Clarington, and funding of the Highway 2 line as one of the top 15 priorities.

He seems to have gotten to Royson James of the Star as well; James was mentioning Durham as being underserved in his column today. I really can't figure out what the problem is. Granted Durham has lots of problems with local service today - DRT is just awful - but that's where Anderson needs to focus his attention, not on demanding even more megaprojects.

Instead, he's threatening to not support the RTP. <sigh>

 

[Tewder]

Some questions for those of us in the Hamilton/Burlington end of the region...

1. Does express rail basically mean above-ground subway-style trains?

2. Will service through the Lakeshore corridor follow the existing Go line or will a new line be built?

3. Will service run all day and what kind of intervals could we expect?

4. What would the travel time be from Hamilton to Toronto Union and what kind of stops would there be in between?

Really excited about this service and as a reluctant driver I would definitely be inclined to leave the vehicle at home. That said, I too feel it's important for people in Toronto to have a DRL, which would also make commuting into Toronto more convenient.

 

[DavidH]

1. Does express rail basically mean above-ground subway-style trains?

Roughly. Specific technologies need to be chosen, but it is almost certain to be electric and above-ground. These might be EMU (self-propelled) or it could be existing bilevel cars behind an electric loco, though. The key thing is that headways could be as low as 5 minutes during rush hour and 15 minutes at other times.

2. Will service through the Lakeshore corridor follow the existing Go line or will a new line be built?

TBD, but I'd bet on the existing corridor.

3. Will service run all day and what kind of intervals could we expect?

All day and see above.

4. What would the travel time be from Hamilton to Toronto Union and what kind of stops would there be in between?

Stops would be 2-5 km apart. Travel time would be about 10 minutes faster than the current situation.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

The individual EA will decide if this means converting the SRT to LRT or building Eglinton as SRT. The bottom line is that you won't have to transfer at Kennedy.

I certainly look forward to that EA however. A line with no transfer at Kennedy would be sweet. It would become an effective alternative to the BD line with reduced transfers and faster total travel times.

There may not be a transfer at Kennedy, but most will still have to transfer onto the line at STC/Lawrence, and transfer again at Eglinton. Compared to a [cheaper] Danforth subway extension to STC, very few people will benefit from a combined Eglinton/SRT line other than small and entirely theoretical groups of riders, particularly since the Midtown GO line will parallel and duplicate this Malvern-Pearson corridor service...planning arrows win but the city loses. It's ridiculous.

2) I really don't understand the logic of this subway extension on Yonge ... maybe to Steeles but even then.
What exactly is the total ridership coming into the finch go/yrt terminal. We know Viva Blue is somewhere around 15K ... My guess would be the grand total (excluding GO busses) so we're taking about YRT + Brampton would be something less then 30K ... maybe even 25K. Many of these routes also wont be completely eliminated by the subway. So why oh why do we need a subway??? What was Sheppard's pre-subway ridership ... low 40K ... and we already consider that a failure ...

A 2km subway extension north of Finch station would, among other things, 1) be very well used, 2) be profitable, 3) replace the >120 buses per hour trundling up Yonge...and this is before factoring in redevelopments. It is also undeniable that there isn't another 2km stretch anywhere in the entire city that would benefit as much from a subway line [extension] as Yonge to Steeles. There is a question about where the line should terminate - one could make a good case for each of Steeles, Clark, Langstaff, even 16th or Major Mack as suitable terminus points - but there is absolutely no question that the line *needs* to be extended to Steeles.

You may consider Sheppard a failure but you are wrong. Ridership along the Sheppard corridor between Yonge and Don Mills has basically doubled in the past 6 years...and possibly more than doubled, given the decent level of turnover along the Sheppard corridor (clearly evident on the 190) that serves to effectively lower ridership at any one point (pre-subway Sheppard bus ridership was not low 40K immediately east of Yonge). Condos have added some thousands but the lure of the subway has also added thousands - just look at Bessarion station, which achieves something like a 50% transit mode share for the few thousand people (so far) nearby.

 

[jn_12]

Just to point out one thing... We can't simply add up the totals of a bunch of bus lines to get a figure for how many people will use a subway line. Fact is, subways are far more attractive to people who use cars, as not only are they faster but psychologically, buses tend to have a stigma attached to them that subways don't. For people in the suburbs, a subway would seem much "cooler" to use than any bus could be. So the number of new transit riders could increase ridership significantly

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

There is a question about where the line should terminate - one could make a good case for each of Steeles, Clark, Langstaff, even 16th or Major Mack as suitable terminus points - but there is absolutely no question that the line *needs* to be extended to Steeles.

I agree - but I think once you're at Steeles it's absurd not to go north since the traffic etc does not magically stop on the other side of this arbritrary boundary.

There is a major transit hub at Hwy 7 - Go, Viva etc - and it is earmarked as a Places to Grow growth node. Given those factors, I don't understand the questions about going north of Steeles. Why on earth would you stop 5km away from an area that is set to see something like 30,000 people move in over the next little while?

Everyone one thinks their hood is the most under-served but you can't just fix the 416 problems - you also have to make it easier for 905ers to get around or you'll never do anything to curtail "sprawl." In fact, you'd be better off if you pretended there was no 416/905 divide at all.

As for Sheppard, I've always been of the school that says it's pointless to call it a failure or otherwise assess it in its current state. If it went to STC and Downsview and still had low ridership that would be another matter. Instead it stands as a perfect example of the cheap, limited, whatever-we-can-afford-right-now, short-term planning that TTC has perfected over the years. We can only hope Metrolinx will show em how it's done.

And, in answer to the Q of how often Lakeshore GO will run, MacIsaac said he hopes it will be as much as every 5 mins at rush hour and every 15 at off-peak. It's a new world out there.

 

[taal]

Yes all good points ...

I personally wouldn't call Sheppard a failure at all! I think the idea behind building it at the time as opposed to other locations was the failure.

I can only imagine the ammount of ridership on the Sheppard line once Concord's development and others complete.

It's hard to argue that it shouldn't be built to Steeles so I'll admit that much but then the question becomes as has been pointed out where should it stop.

Steeles seems ideal to me in many ways ... I really doubt the Hi-way 7 terminal will reach anything near 30K in a long while. Viva Purple + pink together aren't even 15K I think. So why spend the extra money now?

Why not stop at Steeles. This isn't a 416/905 issue at all to me - by all means build the Steeles stop in the 905 if the matter is that silly. Then have a dedicated lane on Yonge all the way up to Hi-way 7 for buses and potentially LRT (even that I think we can wait on).

There are very few routes that come from the Hi-way 7 / Yonge terminal to Finch ... most of these branch off from the side so one could argue it's really only going to be used by Viva + Go riders (and a couple of others) hence why the number isn't that high. I haven't really looked into all the other GO developments - if they will possibily put WAY more people at this terminal and I mean double tripple 4x what there is now ... maybe consider building it.

 

[taal]

The key thing to remember is all of this cost $$$ ... for a subway ... a lot of it!

All of these reports really fail to mention where the money will come from. If you really think we'll get all this money (at least in some timely matter) I think your way off.

So the question becomes how to most effectively spend the $$$ we will get. My argument is that a subway to Steeles and a dedicated lane on Yonge is best (no LRT on Yonge is even needed).

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

The key thing to remember is all of this cost $$$ ... for a subway ... a lot of it!

All of these reports really fail to mention where the money will come from. If you really think we'll get all this money (at least in some timely matter) I think your way off.

So the question becomes how to most effectively spend the $$$ we will get. My argument is that a subway to Steeles and a dedicated lane on Yonge is best (no LRT on Yonge is even needed).

I disagree but it's not a ridiculous argument to make.
That said, it's basically moot at this point. York Region wants the subway and the province wants it and the planning is all but done already.

I think you also might be underestimating how many bus routes won't go to Finch anymore. According to York Region, 19 bus routes will stop at Langstaff. Steeles has 16 (obviously some are the same). Still, that's 140 buses an hour stopping at Steeles instead of going to Finch.

I think all the condo development you see north of Sheppard now will basically extend to Hwy 7 in the next 20 years, aside from a break around the Thornhill heritage district. It might not be quite on that scale but it will be a major change from what's there now.

The money thing was half-answered yesterday. The money for the subway is there right now. As for the $30 billion for post-2015 projects? That remains unclear, though I expect the feds to step up with the $6 billion for Move2020 sooner or later.

I understand the quibbles about ridership numbers but it's really all academic - we're talking about changing the culture of how people get around the GTA, and the 905 in particular. I don't want to blab on about modal splits but the transit has to be there if the condo plans coming down the pipe in Thornhill and Richmond Hill aren't going to swamp the surrounding communities.

Metrolinx says their plan will cut commutes by 5 minutes which really sounds not worth it. But then remember we're talking about adding 2.5 million people while not allowing the commute to get longer. That, in itself, is an achivement. At this point, of course, it's also merely an educated guess....

 

[AgentOrange]

Doing something about the East/West King and Queen lines should be one of the priorities.

For the past few years (to and from work) I have been taking the King streetcar and it is getting more packed with people and slower every day. It is only going to get worse with all of the condo developments going up from Peter/BlueJays Way to Strachan where I get on and off.

The amount of cars on this street are the cause of this.

Dont they know about the one way streets that are much quicker? LOL

I would kill for a subway on King and Queen. It would make commuting back and forth to work take the amount of time it should take.

I am now considering a scooter which would be way more effective/efficient then paying/taking the TTC.