How does improved train service at Richmond Hill help with the issue of hundreds of busses traveling the section of Yonge between Finch and Steeles? How does improved train service help commuters in the northmost part of Toronto and those in Thornhill? Ought they travel north on Yonge some 6-7 KM in order to take a train into the city? Steeles between Yonge and well west of Bathurst is lined with high rises and townhouses in a very dense cluster both North and South of Steeles. Your plan does nothing to improve service for the tens of thousands who live in this middle ground between Finch and Hwy 7.

Ought the transit planners ingore this group altogether?

Wait a second just how many of those hundreds of busses travelling along Yonge between Finch and Steeles (or hell Finch and Hwy 7 for that matter) actually originate from somewhere between those two points. The majority of busses clogging Yonge are actually coming from beyond RHC IMHO.
15
In fact look at a map of the routes feeding into Finch... Of the 8 TTC routes, really none venture North of Steeles); and 9 YRT/GO routes, all of them (VIVA PINK, VIVA BLUE, 91 Bayview, 98 and 99 Yonge, 77, 2 Milliken, 5 Clark, 88 Bathurst, 23 Thornhill Woods) serve or originate North of Steeles, and 5 (VIVA PINK, VIVA BLUE, 98 and 99 Yonge, 91 Bayview, and to some extent 23 Thornhill Woods) serve or originate past RHC terminal. Furthermore Rte's 98/99 and VIVA BLUE (which is a large contributor to the congestion) actually continue North along Yonge, wonder how those passengers will feel about having to make the SAME transfer only 7 or 8 km further north.

The point I'm trying to make is that the vast majority of the regional transit riders ARE NOT coming from a narrow band around Yonge between Finch and Hwy 7. They are coming from North of 7, or well East and West of Yonge that extending the subway likely WILL NOT improve the perceived service that riders receive.
 
Problem is, you're talking about TODAY and not looking at the larger planning context.
There already new secondary plans for both sides of Yonge and there is plenty of density, even without redeveloping historical Thornhill (which, really, is like 4 blocks and a valley).
Fact is, the province has put in to place legislation that REQUIRES Richmond Hill and Markham to intensify at Yonge/7. Fact is, those plans are now in place and entirely contingent on subway and all-day GO and the 407 Transitway. Every one of those you don't build, you knock down the density and population numbers. Go for LRT or BRT, you do the same.
If that happens, they don't hit the targets.

They don't hit the targets, you can count on more people living out in Greenbelt land and they'll buy more SUVs or take whatever mediocre, overtaxed system GO has OR they'll keep driving down or riding buses to Finch. You'll be on a more-crowded subway or totally gridlocked streets.

You are not solving any problems by building to Steeles, unless you count Toronto taxpayer attitudes as a problem to be solved. If you think Toronto's economic success isn't related to people being able to get to/from the 905 efficiently, you're mistaken there too.

The entire region is decades behind on transit planning and you want to cut if off at Steeles - a project with a complete EA and as much planning rationale as any transit project in The Big Move - because of what? Just build the damned thing already. Cutting transit lines too short has been Toronto's modus operandi for way too long. It's ironic you cite Sheppard as a white elephant while also advocating for the neutering of the Yonge extension

Let's build for and with the future for a change, shall we?

I never look at today event when looking at urban and transit planing, but 25, 50 and 100 year out look.

On my 2006 GTA Master Transit Plan, I have 4 subway lines going into York Region to Major Mack, as well an east-west line.

Those lines will not happen until 2050 except the Spadina Line at the earliest. The one that may happen before then is the DRL up to Hwy 7.

Regardless if the DRL is built to Hwy 7 or not, a "NEW" Yonge line will have to be built, as the existing line is never going to carry the new riders in Toronto, let alone York. This is after the DRL is built, since those lost riders will be replace by new development on Yonge St alone, plus more. There are about 55 projects underway or plan for Yonge today and that only a start from Queen St to Steeles. The best TTC can hope for Yonge is 33,000 riders in one direction from a single location at peak time based on the new TR trains. If you got 40,000, where do you place the other 7,000??

Any new line going north of Steeles has to be build for double deck trains that will run on the rail corridor as well. It will be more an express lines with very few stops to the Queens Quay.

What is going on here as well with GO Transit, is allowing growth to leap frog the Greenbelt for low density development and not deal with the root of the problem and that is cars and poor land use.

I have only support the "Yonge Line Extension" as far as Steeles from day one, since it should had happen when the line was built in the first place.

If you look at the buses using Yonge St today, only York Region Route 5, 99 and Blue carry riders on Yonge St today and 5 is pushing it. I don't count Pink as its a joke route with very poor ridership in the first place and will disappear in a few years.

All the other YRT and TTC routes use Steeles to get to the Yonge line and will have no effect on ridership for the Yonge Line north of Steeles. Having 3,000-8,000 riders going north of Steeles on a subway is a waste of resources and gold plated service.

Based on current planning trend for York, going to take decades to bring any real development along Yonge and to the side of it. Both Bathurst and Bayview have more development than Yonge in York.

It takes money to built transit and that the big problem, as the power to be don't understand it not $50 billion to do the "BIG MOVE", nor the $90 that was cut to $50, but $150 Billion and growing. GO Transit has been the hog on most of this money at this time with York getting the next slice. Now Toronto has it act together, it will come the next hog, but long over due.

TTC is looking at $50 Billion alone to built the transit system it needs yesterday.

With the lack of funding, you have to get the biggest bang for the buck and fund projects that will have the highest ridership return for that buck.

Yonge is not that one, considering York is banking on it to get them out of the $2 billion debit by having development to cover it.

In the early Metrolinx stakeholders meetings in York, I was a stakeholder to the point I meet a number of developers/landowner along Yonge who saw 25% of the population driving regardless the cost of fuel and had no real interested in transit riders living in their developments. They were prepared to sit on land/buildings until there was a real strong financial return market to make a good profit even if it took years or decades.

When I look at the Yonge Line vs Mississauga LRT and Hamilton LRT, the LRT projects will cost the same as the Yonge Line, but will carry 2-3 times more riders than Yonge, even at 2040.

The GTA is one big urban sprawl and going to take 50-100 years to fix that problem to be able to run transit lines at a low cost ratio than today.

York has a number of routes today that cost over $10 per rider to use it and riders still pay the standard fare. I know for a fact that Mississauga has a fair number of routes like York and they are being kill off year by year since 40% of them will see no growth in them now or down the road due to low density. This applies to all other areas in the GTA.

If you want transit, then $.15 has to be added to the pumps that goes into the transit fund only along with fee on all parking spaces. As you add these taxes, the return will start to fall overtime as landowners start to reduces the parking spots and people will drive less than they do today. Over the past few years, the USA has seen billion of mile reduction in traveling which save millions of barrel of oil and hit the oil company bottom line.

If the powers to be had any backbone and the guts in the first place, they would start downsizing parking standards for all development and look at ways to beef up transit. At the same time, better land use and density needs to increase as well freezing land use and development.

As for Sheppard, I do have a Sheppard subway on my master plan going from Pickering to Sq One by the way of the airport, but way down the road in phases.
 
Wait a second just how many of those hundreds of busses travelling along Yonge between Finch and Steeles (or hell Finch and Hwy 7 for that matter) actually originate from somewhere between those two points. The majority of busses clogging Yonge are actually coming from beyond RHC IMHO.
15
In fact look at a map of the routes feeding into Finch... Of the 8 TTC routes, really none venture North of Steeles); and 9 YRT/GO routes, all of them (VIVA PINK, VIVA BLUE, 91 Bayview, 98 and 99 Yonge, 77, 2 Milliken, 5 Clark, 88 Bathurst, 23 Thornhill Woods) serve or originate North of Steeles, and 5 (VIVA PINK, VIVA BLUE, 98 and 99 Yonge, 91 Bayview, and to some extent 23 Thornhill Woods) serve or originate past RHC terminal. Furthermore Rte's 98/99 and VIVA BLUE (which is a large contributor to the congestion) actually continue North along Yonge, wonder how those passengers will feel about having to make the SAME transfer only 7 or 8 km further north.

The point I'm trying to make is that the vast majority of the regional transit riders ARE NOT coming from a narrow band around Yonge between Finch and Hwy 7. They are coming from North of 7, or well East and West of Yonge that extending the subway likely WILL NOT improve the perceived service that riders receive.

Did you even think before replying?

Just because the Yonge subway starts north of Sheppard doesn't mean that a large chunk of riders don't get on the subway between Sheppard and Eglinton...Likewise, just because a bus route starts well north of HWY 7, it doesn't mean that most of it's riders come from north of HWY 7.

Notwhitstanding, the further north the subway is built towards Hwy 7, the shorter a ride it is for these so-called people north of HWY7 to get to the subway which will dramatically reduce their overall travel time... Even riders coming from the east or west would have a shorter ride considering they would just have to go across Clark or Steeles instead of trekking down Yonge to Finch.

And for VIVA blue, you do realize that dedicated BRT lanes are being built north of HWY 7 and on HWY 7 east and west from RHC right? The most congested part of their entire route is the section between RHC and Finch. These riders going north would be ecstatic about transferring further north since it would be a shorter trip overall, and they wouldn't be stuck in traffic.
 
Did you even think before replying?

Just because the Yonge subway starts north of Sheppard doesn't mean that a large chunk of riders don't get on the subway between Sheppard and Eglinton...Likewise, just because a bus route starts well north of HWY 7, it doesn't mean that most of it's riders come from north of HWY 7.

Notwhitstanding, the further north the subway is built towards Hwy 7, the shorter a ride it is for these so-called people north of HWY7 to get to the subway which will dramatically reduce their overall travel time... Even riders coming from the east or west would have a shorter ride considering they would just have to go across Clark or Steeles instead of trekking down Yonge to Finch.

And for VIVA blue, you do realize that dedicated BRT lanes are being built north of HWY 7 and on HWY 7 east and west from RHC right? The most congested part of their entire route is the section between RHC and Finch. These riders going north would be ecstatic about transferring further north since it would be a shorter trip overall, and they wouldn't be stuck in traffic.

Take a deep breath bud. Maybe you have the boarding counts per stop served and you can share, however my experience has been that the majority of passengers coming into Finch on Blue, or 77, or whatever are already on the bus well before hitting RHC or Yonge St. I would argue that there is far more density and ridership along Yonge between 7 and 16'th/Rutherford than there is between 7 and Steeles.

Basically by building the extension to RHC sure you will take buses off of the Finch to RHC corridor but you aren't removing the buses off the road you are simply relocating them to RHC. Which IMHO isn't exactly a very accessible location what with that goofy 1/4 cloverleaf design.
 
Take a deep breath bud. Maybe you have the boarding counts per stop served and you can share, however my experience has been that the majority of passengers coming into Finch on Blue, or 77, or whatever are already on the bus well before hitting RHC or Yonge St. I would argue that there is far more density and ridership along Yonge between 7 and 16'th/Rutherford than there is between 7 and Steeles.

Basically by building the extension to RHC sure you will take buses off of the Finch to RHC corridor but you aren't removing the buses off the road you are simply relocating them to RHC. Which IMHO isn't exactly a very accessible location what with that goofy 1/4 cloverleaf design.

But that's the thing, you ARE taking them off the road. By reducing each of those route's total length you are automatically reducing the amount of buses and operators needed for the route. Couple that with the new BRT lanes on hwy 7 and Yonge north of RHC and you need even less buses and operators to achieve the same capacity. If what you are proposing is that most people's destination coming north from RHC on VIVA blue, for instance, than this type of a scenario can only stand to benefit that customer base, allowing for higher frequencies with the same amount of operating costs, or even less.

While I agree, on Yonge proper, there may more density between 7 and 16th (albeit, marginally more if you take out the fact that Thornhill downtown cannot accomodate High density because of heritage zoning). You have to understand that the zoning and the master plans in Markham and Vaughan both designate high desnity as well as require it between Steeles and Hwy7 to meet their density targets. It's not a matter of if, but a matter of when. It would be irresponsible to add all those condos and development if the necessary transportation facilities aren't available. As it stands this area is one of the most congested areas in York Region.

An LRT line from Finch or STeeles all the way up Yonge would only make things worse for the riders you are looking at. While it may be more convenient for riders along yonge who would only need to make one transfer. Riders from the east or west would be required to be accomodated on the Yonge LRT, as well as make 2 or even three transfers from their origin to somewhere along the subway line. This would only make things uneccesraily complicated, and in fact, more stressful than the current situation. The subway up to Hwy 7 would provide adequate capacity.
 
Yeah, what BMO said.
And that's only buses. Let's not forget about all the cars, coming from the east, west and north down to Finch every day. If they park at Langstaff instead that does nothing but help the transit down around the municipal border. If you're in Toronto, I don't see how you can ignore the benefit of getting all those people on an underground train before they even think of clogging up your roads. (Which, by the way, ends up costing you plenty of money that just happens to be more hidden than subway operating costs.)

As for Drum118's plan, I totally agree there needs to be some sort of road pricing or tax or whatever to create a sustainable fund for transit. I have no idea, however, what makes you think it's going to decades for development along Yonge. There are MASSIVE towers under construction now and at least two or three other developments in the pipe. Langstaff is ready to get going; if the subway was announced tomorrow there'd probably be sales offices up by the weekend. It will decades to build OUT but the development isn't waiting for the subway.

(I am, this very second, looking out my window at World on Yonge which is only about half built and already TOWERING over everything else nearby. Decades? More like months.)

If you're implying that York Region won't go further into debt to pay its share of the subway, I strongly disagree. They seem quite happy to spend their share and have made it clear, at the regional and local level, it's a huge priority. The issue is everyone else's share of the funding.

I understand your personal plan only goes up to Steeles but around here it's the province's plans that actually matter and they have made it clear - both in Places to Grow and in The Big Move - that going up to Hwy. 7 is a huge priority. So, that ship has sailed. It's all about the money now. I don't know how soon Yonge will happen but I'm certainly going to take your bet it will be there before 2050. If it's NOT built by 2050 (or 2030, or underway by 2020 for that matter) Toronto might as well cash out and move the whole operation to Detroit because by that point it will have totally given up on building the transit infrastructure it needs to even tread water, economically.)
 
Last edited:
When read along with the March, 2012 report, the latest report includes some really useful statistics concerning where people are actually going (in the year 2031). In summary:

- Without the extension, there would still be 10,000 existing riders per hour heading southbound into Finch.
- The extension will add an extra 10,000 new riders southbound into Finch, for a total of 20,000 riders per hour.
- Without the extension, there would be 35,800 people per hour on the Yonge line south of Bloor. The extension will add 3,600 riders per hour for a total of 39,400.

Of the 10,000 new riders per hour that the extension creates, only 3,600 per hour stay on south of Bloor. You could therefore say that only 36% of the new riders are heading to the broader downtown area, let alone all the way to Union. Enhancing GO service instead would therefore ignore the needs of 64% of the riders in the corridor. Another way of looking at it is that riders heading only as far as midtown outnumber those heading all the way downtown by about a factor of about 2:1.

Improvements to GO certainly are important, however building the Yonge Extension is at least twice as important, based on where the riders are actually going. Even if the overall ridership numbers are inflated, the ratio doesn't change. Considering that the Yonge extension improves both types of trips (as opposed to GO which can only take people downtown), it's obvious which project is more needed.
 
When read along with the March, 2012 report, the latest report includes some really useful statistics concerning where people are actually going (in the year 2031). In summary:

- Without the extension, there would still be 10,000 existing riders per hour heading southbound into Finch.
- The extension will add an extra 10,000 new riders southbound into Finch, for a total of 20,000 riders per hour.
- Without the extension, there would be 35,800 people per hour on the Yonge line south of Bloor. The extension will add 3,600 riders per hour for a total of 39,400.

Of the 10,000 new riders per hour that the extension creates, only 3,600 per hour stay on south of Bloor. You could therefore say that only 36% of the new riders are heading to the broader downtown area, let alone all the way to Union. Enhancing GO service instead would therefore ignore the needs of 64% of the riders in the corridor. Another way of looking at it is that riders heading only as far as midtown outnumber those heading all the way downtown by about a factor of about 2:1.

Improvements to GO certainly are important, however building the Yonge Extension is at least twice as important, based on where the riders are actually going. Even if the overall ridership numbers are inflated, the ratio doesn't change. Considering that the Yonge extension improves both types of trips (as opposed to GO which can only take people downtown), it's obvious which project is more needed.

Good analysis. Where are the other 64% headed though, and can those trip patterns be absorbed by the rest of the rapid transit network? That's the next question to ask.
 
If they aren't going south of Bloor then wherever they are going after they step off the Yonge line is either in walking distance from a station or on a route against the rush hour flow, so does it matter?
 
If they aren't going south of Bloor then wherever they are going after they step off the Yonge line is either in walking distance from a station or on a route against the rush hour flow, so does it matter?

If it's on rapid transit, no. But if it's on local transit in mixed traffic, then yes it does matter, because those roads may be complete crapshoots during rush hour. And if those streets are going to be seeing an increase in ridership, some priority measures may need to be looked at in order to smooth out the flow.
 
But it would be against the peak flow of those routes where buses are often unloading at the subway packed with riders, and then leaving the station relatively empty. They are buses that are already there.
 
But it would be against the peak flow of those routes where buses are often unloading at the subway packed with riders, and then leaving the station relatively empty. They are buses that are already there.

I know. I'm not saying the buses are the problem, I'm saying the traffic on the roads may be. We've all had experiences on buses during rush hour where the damn thing seems to just crawl along. I'm saying that it may be worthwhile to look into ways to increase the flow of buses along these routes, especially during rush hour.

Right now, even going eastbound from Eglinton Station during rush hour is a pain. Rapid transit will solve that, but there are plenty of other roads in the midtown area that are almost as bad that aren't getting that same level of relief (if any).
 
When read along with the March, 2012 report, the latest report includes some really useful statistics concerning where people are actually going (in the year 2031). In summary:

- Without the extension, there would still be 10,000 existing riders per hour heading southbound into Finch.
- The extension will add an extra 10,000 new riders southbound into Finch, for a total of 20,000 riders per hour.
- Without the extension, there would be 35,800 people per hour on the Yonge line south of Bloor. The extension will add 3,600 riders per hour for a total of 39,400.

Of the 10,000 new riders per hour that the extension creates, only 3,600 per hour stay on south of Bloor. You could therefore say that only 36% of the new riders are heading to the broader downtown area, let alone all the way to Union. Enhancing GO service instead would therefore ignore the needs of 64% of the riders in the corridor. Another way of looking at it is that riders heading only as far as midtown outnumber those heading all the way downtown by about a factor of about 2:1.

.

Not to quibble too much but I think your math makes a bit of a leap.....you take 3,600 of the new riders (so 36% of new) and subract that from 100% and say that this means enhanced GO service ignores the need of 64% of the corrider's riders. That of course ignores the 10,000 existing riders (ie. the 36% of new riders only represent 18% of the combined total of 20,000). Without knowing where the original 10,000 riders are going your 64% number is, to be fair, made up. (ie. if all 10k of those are going south of Bloor and you combine that with the new 3,600....it could be said that enhanced GO service is good for 68% of the total and "only" ignores the needs of 32%).

The truth, likely, lies somewhere in the middle. ;)
 
I'm going to make a prediction: This gets built before the DRL. I'm not saying this because it makes sense technically. I don't feel it does. I'm saying this because it makes sense politically, and ultimately that's all that matters. There is no political upside to the DRL.

A provincial party going there will just have forfeited all the seats in Toronto
 
I'm going to make a prediction: This gets built before the DRL. I'm not saying this because it makes sense technically. I don't feel it does. I'm saying this because it makes sense politically, and ultimately that's all that matters. There is no political upside to the DRL.

A provincial party going there will just have forfeited all the seats in Toronto

After reading the report, the ridership numbers are underestimated.
I live through the extension of the Orange line in Montreal which is virtually identical to the Yonge line.

http://www.stm.info/english/metro/images/plan-metro.jpg

They thought the extension to Laval was a good idea and in terms of numbers, it made sense. Montreal being an island, the STL buses from Laval we're lining up on bridges.

The result is that the line is now operating way overcapacity. They weren't wrong in their ridership projections for the surroundings of Laval. Since predicting human behavior can be pretty difficult, they never expected that people living hours away from Laval would now drive to take the new subway.

Makes sense. The congestion on the highway starts just before the bridges to Montreal south of Laval. People were already turned off to drive to the island to work, let alone to take the subway. With the new subway, people were driving from as far as Mont-Tremblay and Mont-Laurier (Far north) down to Laval and park their cars to the subway, which for us and the planners was insane. The parking lots in Laval were full and as of today, they are still trying to build more parking spots to solve the problem. The orange line at peak hour is a nightmare and they don't have a plan B.

The funny part is that the commuter train that is running from St-Jerome to Montreal's Bonaventure is connected to one of the metro stations in Laval and have 2 additional stops next to highway 15.

http://www.amt.qc.ca/uploadedImages/AMT/Site_Usager/Train/BlocDroit/Train_Map_Agrandi.jpg?n=7501

The solution was to run frequent express trains from St-Jerome to Downtown Montreal and increase capacity on the line. Now they can't, due to the east commuter line being built and being so over budget that they had to cancel stops.

A subway extension to Richmond Hill will do the same. They're predictions are too low and doesn't take under consideration that people will be driving from way farther away which will still get them to the subway in a decent amount of time due to the lack of traffic in the 905.

The Richmond Hill GO train should be massively improved and stations should be build at Eglinton Crosstown and the Bloor line for those who want to go Uptown and Midtown.

Don't believe me?
look at the RER of Paris. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RER
That's the model that GO Transit needs to replicate...Express lines out of the city and stops at strategic points in the city like this station
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Châtelet_-_Les_Halles_(Paris_RER)
 

Back
Top