[CDL.TO]

WOW, I just realized how similar the layout of the Montreal Metro is to the Toronto Subway:

-the green line is BD
-the orange line is YUS
-the blue line is Sheppard (had it been completed CORRECTLY)
-the yellow line is nothing, except maybe something like a subway version of the Harbourfront streetcar

And just like in Toronto, the commuter rail line that could potentially take pressure off the overcrowded subway line takes a longer, winding route into the downtown core which is therefore even slower than the subway.

And in both cases, the removal of short sections of mainline track by cost-cutting rail companies has hampered the possibility of a quicker, more direct routing (Leaside Branch in Toronto, Blainville line to Deux-Montagnes connection via St. Laurent Sub in Montreal).

Ooh, creepy.

 

[Chuck]

No, York Region is not planning to pay for any of the Yonge extension. It's all coming from the province.

Funny how York Region does not seem to have a problem with planning a line with subpar ridership numbers when they know they won't have to pay to build or operate it.

Even Funnier how you don't have a clue about what you're talking about. A few years back, the TTC studied the feasibility of various new subway lines based on ridership per km, cost, and a number of other variables. It was determined by the TTC itself that the Yonge extension to Highway 7 would be the most cost effective and heaviest used new subway line behind a DRL. The subway extension into York Region was ruled out as it would quickly become a victim of its success, and overload the system. Now that capacity issues are no longer insurmountable, there's no reason why the Yonge subway shouldn't be built, along with the DRL.

By the way, the TTC's report from the meeting is available in the reports section of their webpage. They are predicting a daily ridership of 115,000 (edit: in 2031) at Richmond Hill station, making it the busiest non transfer point subway station in the system.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

Yonge north of Finch is not a subway line, it is a subway extension. I doubt there's a transit line anywhere in the world that is at capacity at its terminus station. If the Yonge extension is "subpar ridership," would the following be "par"?

 

[Voltz]

I don't have a clue of what I'm talking about? That subway report from the TTC a few years ago was from a time when they where still planning subway lines for the sake of planning subway lines (as York still seems to be doing), they where not concerned about riders as a whole, they were only worried about making the construction engineers happy.

By subpar ridership numbers I mean the 8,800 per hour that are expected to use the extension in 2031, that is less than one third of what the yonge line currently carries, not that the number needs to be higher before a subway extension is built, but it should at least be above what other modes can handle before they are not considered.

Although the expected ridership is low, for a subway, it would provide better service for the people that would use it than other modes. But then again, everyone's trip would be better if a subway was available, but that does not mean it should get built.

 

[Voltz]

Yonge north of Finch is not a subway line, it is a subway extension. I doubt there's a transit line anywhere in the world that is at capacity at its terminus station. If the Yonge extension is "subpar ridership," would the following be "par"?

I did not know that a Subway extension costs less to build and operate than a Subway line, my mistake. If that is true then where should the extensions stop? at the furthest point of origin?

 

[Ansem]

So the magical thing that you think happens at Steeles is a giant river?.

My point is to develop Toronto system before going beyond the city's limits. If your transit system is incomplete in Toronto, you can't expect an extension beyond city limits to make things better. Finish what is incomplete and then we go beyond.

Listen, there is genuinely a huge separation between Montreal and Laval, and it ain't an area code. It's the St. Lawrence River. Montreal is an island. Toronto is certainly not one..

It's Rivieres-Des-Prairies. Part of the tunnel was already there years ago when they built Henri-Bourassa.

If your argument is that subway extension leads to overcrowding, so don't touch the thing, then why the heck would you want it extended to Steeles? It's not making a lot of sense to me..

To improve the system within the city of Toronto before going beyond. Of course people from Richmond Hill will love the subway, just like those living in Laval. But those living at Sheppard-Yonge all the way to Rosedale get penalize with poor service just like Montrealers living below Sauvé or Crémazie. And believe me, just like in our newspaper, there will be A LOT of complaints and the TTC won’t be able to do nothing.

Read this article below:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/2008/04/15/qc-mtccomplaints0415.html

I rest my case.

Noone ever takes the blue line. It never comes. (Sorry, bad memories from my U de M days living in Snowdon.) Seriously, the blue line is not so relevant..

Time changed. That line used to closed at 11h15pm and had only 3 wagons. Now it closes at 1h15am and have 6 wagons. It didn't had a great ridership in the past but it attracted new condos and businesses along the line and now it's a success. Expansion to Anjou in the east is planned before 2020 and west side to Montreal-West. So the idea of killing the Sheppard subway is the most AMATEUR move I’ve seen in a long time.

Blue line aside, yes, they should do the DRL, and they should finish Sheppard (but won't -- it's been Giambroneyed). They should also get their act together with the Richmond Hill GO line, for that matter. But none of this obviates the need to extend the Yonge line north.

I'm not saying not to do the extension... just improve the current system within the city first. Finish Sheppard subway, implement Transit city, built DRL. Then you go beyond.

Because of the problems in Laval, the Yellow which goes under St-Lawrence River goes to the City of Longueuil is on hold for further extension. That line is overcrowding Berri-Uquam (equivalent of Bloor-Yonge). Instead of building extensions, they are considering an LRT from Longueuil to the green line and to extend the yellow line to McGill (equivalent of Dundas).

Hey' I'm just telling you what happened in Montreal when we went outside of city limits without improving the service in the city first.

Montreal's bus and subway service is nowhere near Toronto's. Let's just not make the same mistake.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

I did not know that a Subway extension costs less to build and operate than a Subway line, my mistake. If that is true then where should the extensions stop? at the furthest point of origin?

You keep on harping about "subpar ridership," yet how can an extension of the Yonge line move as many people as its busiest points downtown? It is impossible for any transit line to successfully run at capacity at its terminus point...this is incredibly obvious!

Finch makes for a fantastically poor terminus point, we've just gotten used to treating it like a good one because that's where it was halted (its *only* redeeming quality, literally, is the parking lots in the hydro corridor). Steeles, should any degree of fare/system integration occur (and Metrolinx is hinting it should happen eventually), would be even worse (it's poor as is). Richmond Hill Centre is the first terminus point north of Finch that makes any sense. If there were any naturally occurring (or germinal yet developable) terminus points between Finch and Hwy 7, then we could talk about stopping somewhere in the middle. But there aren't. Steeles makes no sense. Clark makes no sense. Centre makes no sense. Royal Orchard makes no sense. Longbridge makes no sense. The last thing we need to do is punish generations of transit users (and drive some away from transit and into their cars) by building another Downsview, or another Kennedy, or another Kipling, or another Finch, and pretending that those were logical places to stop.

 

[toraerach]

My point is to develop Toronto system before going beyond the city's limits. If your transit system is incomplete in Toronto, you can't expect an extension beyond city limits to make things better. Finish what is incomplete and then we go beyond.

They already expanded beyond city limits when they expanded the subway system into North York, Etobicoke, and Scarborough. Then the city expanded. City borders are arbitrary lines on a map and they can and do change. What is incomplete is the transit system downtown and that is the problem, but the city seems unwilling to tackle this head on. They are no TC lines planned for the downtown core and the DRL is some vague plan for ten years from now.

The Richmond Hill extension and the DRL are both good ideas that deserve to be built. York Region is pushing hard for their extension, while the TTC in their report seem to be saying "DRL if necessary, but not necessarily DRL." No wonder the former is being built before we see any major investment in the Downtown Core. With TC the City of Toronto pretty much said the system south of Bloor is more or less complete already, and the only reason these northward extensions became a priority is that there were no other subway expansion proposals brought forward. You can't say the province chose the 905 over the 416 because they didn't really have a choice. Miller and Giambrone said "no more subways" so that's what they got.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

My point is to develop Toronto system before going beyond the city's limits. If your transit system is incomplete in Toronto, you can't expect an extension beyond city limits to make things better. Finish what is incomplete and then we go beyond.

I think we've hit on the nub of your problem. "TORONTO" does not exist except as a municipal government. If this were 1985 would you be talking about the need to solve "Toronto's" traffic issues before dealing with far flung locales like North York and Etobicoke?

If you look at the city from above you would have NO CLUE where Steeles Avenue is, nor Finch, because development KEEPS GOING NORTH. The city boundary is meaningless. Period.

You are not solving ANY of Toronto's problems unless you are solving the REGION'S problems. I don't know why so many people who live in Toronto fail to get this. You actually think that Yonge/Drewry is somehow more deserving of transit than Yonge/7 simply because the former is in 416! It's amazing!

All due respect - it's precisely because of attitudes like this that Metrolinx had to be created. If they persist, particularly at the TTC, you will continue to make a case for why the TTC itself needs to be abolished. Clearly many Torontonians only care about Torontonians.

You demonstrate a failure to realize many basic principles of development and people movement, not the least of which is that a lot of people on the TTC are starting their rides OUTSIDE of Toronto - and this is as true at Finch Station as anywhere else. Get this - people from Richmond Hill are ALREADY taking the subway! They're just driving 30 minutes to get there and paying a double fare.

Only once you can forget about abstract borders can you begin to start talking about this issue seriously.

For the record - I have spent 95% of my life on either side of Steeles Avenue and so the lack of a real border has always been obvious to me. In 2008, it should be obvious to people south of Bloor as well.

 

[Ansem]

I think we've hit on the nub of your problem. "TORONTO" does not exist except as a municipal government. If this were 1985 would you be talking about the need to solve "Toronto's" traffic issues before dealing with far flung locales like North York and Etobicoke?

If you look at the city from above you would have NO CLUE where Steeles Avenue is, nor Finch, because development KEEPS GOING NORTH. The city boundary is meaningless. Period.

You are not solving ANY of Toronto's problems unless you are solving the REGION'S problems. I don't know why so many people who live in Toronto fail to get this. You actually think that Yonge/Drewry is somehow more deserving of transit than Yonge/7 simply because the former is in 416! It's amazing!

All due respect - it's precisely because of attitudes like this that Metrolinx had to be created. If they persist, particularly at the TTC, you will continue to make a case for why the TTC itself needs to be abolished. Clearly many Torontonians only care about Torontonians.

You demonstrate a failure to realize many basic principles of development and people movement, not the least of which is that a lot of people on the TTC are starting their rides OUTSIDE of Toronto - and this is as true at Finch Station as anywhere else. Get this - people from Richmond Hill are ALREADY taking the subway! They're just driving 30 minutes to get there and paying a double fare.

Only once you can forget about abstract borders can you begin to start talking about this issue seriously.

For the record - I have spent 95% of my life on either side of Steeles Avenue and so the lack of a real border has always been obvious to me. In 2008, it should be obvious to people south of Bloor as well.

No need to get all excited. I did mentionned somewhere that I just moved here.

Did you read the CBC article of the impact of the extension to Laval from Montreal?

I'm just showing you what will happen.

I'm perfectly aware that people from Richmond Hill are already taking the subway, just like those from Laval were taking express buses to Montreal Metro.

The problem is by extending the line, you attract new customers. Those customers are people that didn't use public transportation and and decided to leave their cars and take the subway.

Since the network was incomplete, the orange line didn't have the capacity to handle new customers and the same thing will happen to the yonge line.

I never said not to do it. I said to make sure that transit city and Sheppard line is complete AS WELL.

 

[jeicow]

The problem is by extending the line, you attract new customers. Those customers are people that didn't use public transportation and and decided to leave their cars and take the subway.

Yes. That is a problem. It be far better if they are clogging the 416's streets in order to drive downtown, thereby slowing down the 416's bus network since its obvious that our road network has plenty of capacity left to spear.

 

[Ansem]

Yes. That is a problem. It be far better if they are clogging the 416's streets in order to drive downtown, thereby slowing down the 416's bus network since its obvious that our road network has plenty of capacity left to spear.

What part of ''I think it should be done or I didn't say we shouldn't do it'' is not clear?

All I kept saying is that DLR should be done at the same time as the Yonge extension. I went to the Metrolinx consultation and DLR was to be done ''Maybe'' years after the Richmond Hill Stations.

By giving commuters the option of not using the Yonge line but going on the DLR instead or Jane & Don Mills LRT (assuming they are fast), The Yonge line will be able to take the extra customers and retain its efficiency.

Sorry if I sound negative but Its common sense and also because the last five years in Montreal I've seen the Orange line surpassing the green line in ridership and be overcrowded and people are complaning alot.
*Go see the CBC link I've provided earlier*

The lines are almost the same between both cities and its the same scenario.

Maybe an express line like New York would be mandatory if the DLR cannot be built at the same time.

 

[Conrad Black]

I think we've hit on the nub of your problem. "TORONTO" does not exist except as a municipal government. If this were 1985 would you be talking about the need to solve "Toronto's" traffic issues before dealing with far flung locales like North York and Etobicoke?

If you look at the city from above you would have NO CLUE where Steeles Avenue is, nor Finch, because development KEEPS GOING NORTH. The city boundary is meaningless. Period.

You are not solving ANY of Toronto's problems unless you are solving the REGION'S problems. I don't know why so many people who live in Toronto fail to get this. You actually think that Yonge/Drewry is somehow more deserving of transit than Yonge/7 simply because the former is in 416! It's amazing!

The problem is that the taxpayers in 416 pay to subsidize the TTC through their property taxes. Taxpayers in 905 do not subsidize the TTC through their property taxes. So why should I, as a downtowner who is stuck riding the terrible Queen streetcar, be excited about the subway going to highway 7? If the TTC is going to become regional transit than the entire region should pay. And planning should be a regional thing. A DRL would carry significantly more traffic than the Richmond Hill or VCC from day one yet its barely mentioned.

 

[Ansem]

The problem is that the taxpayers in 416 pay to subsidize the TTC through their property taxes. Taxpayers in 905 do not subsidize the TTC through their property taxes. So why should I, as a downtowner who is stuck riding the terrible Queen streetcar, be excited about the subway going to highway 7? If the TTC is going to become regional transit than the entire region should pay. And planning should be a regional thing. A DRL would carry significantly more traffic than the Richmond Hill or VCC from day one yet its barely mentioned.

I didn't know the other cities didn't share the Subway cost.
The Montreal Metropolitain made the Metro a "regional infrastructure". All the surrounding cities have to pay some of the expenses to operate the Metro.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

The problem is that the taxpayers in 416 pay to subsidize the TTC through their property taxes. Taxpayers in 905 do not subsidize the TTC through their property taxes. So why should I, as a downtowner who is stuck riding the terrible Queen streetcar, be excited about the subway going to highway 7? If the TTC is going to become regional transit than the entire region should pay. And planning should be a regional thing. A DRL would carry significantly more traffic than the Richmond Hill or VCC from day one yet its barely mentioned.

Obviously, the people who are most excited are the people who will use it - I'm never likely to use the DRL so I wouldn't be "excited" about it, but I can still agree it should be built. I don't know that anyone on these boards is really against the DRL - it's the TTC who seem to be against it, for whatever nutty reason. Part of this is because they're stubborn and part of it is because we're trying to do two things at the same time, I think:
1) Develop a non-existent transit culture in the burbs before gridlock overtakes us
2) Make up for years of neglecting to develop transit in the core.

Neither should take place independent of the other, IMHO, but I feel I've seen many insisting that #2 trumps #1.

I sort-of understand the property tax issue but all it does is hilight how out of date the borders are in terms of both commuting patterns and funding.
Clearly it does not make sense to take the subway up to Steeles just because it's where the taxpayers end. That attitude is part of how we got to the current mess.

Anyway, TTC is not paying for the extension and they will get 100% of the fare box and parking, so that's the simple benefit. If you do what they're doing - take money allocated for a specific project and then ponder whether the you could spend it better elsewhere, you'll find yourself in a neverending series of academic debates.

I presume that when Metrolinx unveils more of their financial plan it will include some sort of regionally-collected transit tax - clearly that's what makes the most sense since allowing each transit system to only think of itself is not in interest of riders.