[Amare]

What makes this awkward is York's desire is not to have transit not for its own sake, but rather transit that carries people into Toronto.

York does a lot of things that doesnt make any sense. That's part of the reason why they have a massive debt, and YRT continues to be in a continued state of disarray.

Like many have suggested here in one way or another, if York is so keen on extending the subway before relief measures are in place they can either foot the bill themselves or plan an interim solution. Blaming Toronto (in some cases rightfully so) isnt going to solve their problem.

 

[Palma]

Why don't we just let York Region build their extension but charge an extra fare and force a transfer at Finch until the DRL is built? Or allow them to build what they want within their own border.

sounds good to me

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

First, Oliver Moore's simplification is foolish. Obviously part of the line IS in Toronto and equally obviously people from outside Toronto already use the existing line and equally obviously it benefits Toronto and Torontonians. The geographical difference between that VAUGHAN councillor and TORONTO councillor John Filion is about 10 feet. (That's actually hyperbole; it's actually precisely adjacent, so there is no geographical gap, just a mental one.)

Yeah... What you said is not even close.
Assuming the Relief Line timelines are similar and no delays, if funding materializes soon enough to not interrupt the timelines, the Relief Line will be tendered in about 12 months and construction will begin summer/fall of next year.

Because Steve Munro knows all and Toronto always bangs out transit plans and construction on time.

Cluck all you want about cooperation but they've shown their true colours by going over the heads of QP. Their intentions should be clear as day by now.

What are their "true intentions" exactly? To steal a subway?
And going to the feds is not going over the heads of QP. You have no understanding of how politics works. It's not the military.

It's sincerely not Toronto's fault that York has been spending like drunken sailors who now sniff for a bailout from Ottawa to prop up the ponzi scheme they call a city. It's going to be amusing when the hypothetical development in the previously aired renderporn doesn't come to pass and the house of cards comes crashing down.

-They don't call it a city. They call it a Regional Municipality. It's comprised of 9 municipalities. Some are cities. And Ponzi is capitalized.
-They don't need a bailout. Development is coming to YR. Just a q of whether its condos near transit or houses out on the fringe. (Or how many of each, really...)

Why don't we just let York Region build their extension but charge an extra fare and force a transfer at Finch until the DRL is built? Or allow them to build what they want within their own border.

Yes, let's re-invent fare integration as we go. And let's build 20 little transit systems instead of 1 big one. That's how world class cities do it.

Sounds like TJ lol. Word for Word.

3 Possibilities.
1) I am Alan Shefman (or another member of the committee)
2) I can read Metrolinx reports, just like him
3) It's all a big coincdence

 

[innsertnamehere]

No way relief line is tendered that quick.. The environmental assessment won't finish until the end of this year. Then you are looking at 12-18 months of detailed design, then another 12 month tendering process.. construction maybe starts late 2018.

The relief line and Scarborough extension are at the exact same point right now. They could theoretically follow each other all the way through to completion, though the DRL will probably take a bit longer to build. Earliest I see the DRL opening is 2025 or 2026.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Yes, let's re-invent fare integration as we go. And let's build 20 little transit systems instead of 1 big one. That's how world class cities do it.

"World class cities" certainly wouldn't have been stupid enough to extend one line further and further out without adding capacity in the core where the demand is first. Or on that matter, have dumpy middle of nowhere call itself "Metropolitan Centre" when it is neither Metro nor Centre of anything.

AoD

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Sounds like TJ lol. Word for Word.

A proof is a proof...

Ha. I was thinking the exact same thing reading that article.

 

[nfitz]

Today a Vaughan councillor is disputing the "no capacity mythology" pertaining to the Yonge subway, says that...

Saying that the current plans provide a sliver of capacity doesn't seem to be saying that. Wasn't his main point, that it's all about Toronto - which is true. TTC and City have no problem adding the Eglinton line, and Sheppard LRT extension, both of which will increase ridership on the Yonge subway. And instead of going with DLR, they are instead going with the Scarborough Subway extension, which will also add more people to Bloor-Yonge.

So Toronto has not said there's no capacity - but there's no capacity for York. I commend York for pointing out Toronto and TTC's hypocrisy.

And we should give them the subway before the DRL because,

Wasn't that a reference to the Spadina extension, not the Yonge extension?

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

"World class cities" certainly wouldn't have been stupid enough to extend one line further and further out without adding capacity in the core where the demand is first.

no one has prevented Toronto from failing to add capacity in the core. That was THEIR CHOICE.
Sheppard and Eglinton? Their choice.
Transit City? Their choice.
Scarborough subway? Their choice. Over and over.

As Nfitz (and me, and others) have repeatedly pointed out, this CAPACITY CRUSH HORRORSHOW DISASTER was never once mentioned in relation to the Crosstown and Scarborough line, which will both unquestionably add riders to the allegedly-at-capacity Yonge line. But I guess it's OK, because they're not foreign suburbanites?

No one here has refuted, disputed, disproved or acknowledged this.

The world-class reference was in relation to having York Region build its own 3-km subway, which is obviously absurd. They will pay their fair share, as they certainly should. But a disconnected, piecemeal arm of subway is no solution

Anyway, most of the people on these boards aren't dummies so we all know why Toronto transit planning is the way it is. It took a lot of years of shortsighted thinking and 20+ years of inadequate funding to find ourselves where we are today.

But let's be clear on where are: We have a subway extension we KNOW will be hugely successful in terms of addressing current ridership and generating future ridership and significant intensification. Those things are all great and more than can be said for pretty much any transit project now under consideration. That most certainly includes Scarborough as well as Spadina.

The problem is neglect of the existing system means its hard to build that line BECAUSE it will generate so much ridership, which the system cannot handle more of. The good news is that it's a problem of a successful region. Detroit wishes it had this problem. But the bad news is that those Lost Years are coming home to roost and, whether they want to accept responsibility or not, having repercussions that go beyond 416. Toronto should build the DRL and should have built it years ago. It's not the fault of York Region politicians - whose job is to do precisely what they're doing - that their own interconnected growth needs are being impacted. It's a fallacy to assume what happens in YR has no impact on Toronto, and vice versa.

As for the notion that Alan Shefman and I (or is it MYSELF AND MYSELF???) are on exactly the same page - I'm good with that. And that everyone here thinks we have the exact same thinking, well, you're just making me blush.

 

[W. K. Lis]

If York Region is so eager to have the Yonge Subway extension, why isn't Peel Region (Mississauga more so than Brampton) so eager about extending the Bloor Subway into Mississauga? Doesn't Peel Region have a larger population than York Region?

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

no one has prevented Toronto from failing to add capacity in the core. That was THEIR CHOICE.
Sheppard and Eglinton? Their choice.
Transit City? Their choice.
Scarborough subway? Their choice. Over and over.

So? It is also the choice of your region to choose to develop in a way that requires/demands a subway extension. You don't seem to have a problem with unilateral decisions when it is in your favour - and I might add Toronto have a better case for doing so - it is their infrastructure and they aren't sucking off York Region to do it.

It's like someone siphoning off another city's water treatment plant because they're far from the lake and without a water source of their own, and then when the combined demand exceeds the possible supply, cries that their urban expansion must continue come hell or high wate, even if there nary a drop left for the city providing the service, while claiming that expanding said plant should be someone elses' absolute priority (and on their own dime) because it affects their ambitions and indeed manifest destiny. Excuse me? That's impetulance.

AoD

 

[44 North]

I keep seeing two arguments:

• Have GO Transit deal with it and improve service to Richmond Hill, this line will cross borders so it's technically a regional problem!
• It'll push the Yonge Line over capacity

So we're essentially arguing that this line makes so much sense that too many people will use it while suggesting we forego a line that makes a lot of sense in terms of ridership by replacing it with another service that doesn't serve the same areas, has a lower capacity and is planned to have lower frequencies?

#TorontoTransitPlanning

It's a complicated issue, no doubt. And it doesn't help matters much that the public is given misleading/contradictory info, and offered new unstudied ideas while others get dropped. Not to mention being completely left in the dark on many issues. But here's my take on GO for the RH corridor:

It does have a heckuva lot of potential, and does reduce ridership of the Yonge North extension. This isn't opinion - it's what Metrolinx's very own numbers told us several years ago. The Big Move promised RH Express Rail (project #47) - a line important to the region's growth, future transportation, UGCs, and P2G. In 2008 Metrolinx provided modeling data of all the Big Move projects (which AFAIK is the most comprehensive and unbiased data on GTA transit projects/ridership we've ever seen, and will ever see). Long and short, it said that RH Express would carry 31.9M annual riders in 2031 with a peak point ridership of 18.1k. These are large #s. *The line also had an excellent business case provided in a separate 2010 report.

For the Yonge North extension it wasn't as rosy, and the ridership #s come nowhere near the ultra-high projections we're seeing now. Metrolinx's modeling projected the extension would have 8.8k peak point and 19.5M annual riders (approx 65k avg wkday). These are low #s, particularly when compared with its astronomical per km cost. It'd carry less than subways like TYSSE (21.4M/yr), Sheppard Stub (20.8M/yr), and the DRL U (117.1M/yr). Not to mention less than LRT projects like Crosstown (62.7M/yr), Don Mills (39.4M/yr), Scarb RT (31.2M/yr), Waterfront W (29.2M/yr), and Finch W (23.2M/yr). On top of this the low peak #s easily make it a candidate for LRT. If using the mode capacity charts provided by Mlinx and TTC (see: Sheppard and SSE debates) it most likely would be excluded from even being considered worthy of a subway. Perhaps semi-underground Crosstown-style LRT, or fully grade-separated SRT-style LRT. But not 6-car underground subway.

So in 2008 this data showed that 2031 GO RH Express Rail wold carry over 10M more than riders/yr than Yonge North (31.9M vs 19.5M), and have more than 2x its peak point ridership (18.1k vs 8.8k). Unsurprisingly however this 2008 modeling data differed significantly from the 2013 Yonge North Benefits Case report. This report didn't follow the same holistic approach (owing largely to the fact that it dishonestly omitted showing the data comparing both a subway and GO Express to RHC - which were both priorities at the time). The report showed a GO to RHC option, and a subway to RHC option...but what was missing was the data showing the two projects together (and the subsequent ridership diversion this would have). Since the 2008 modeling showed us this data but the subway report didn't, it's reasonable to conclude this omission was deliberate. For anyone wanting to travel from RHC/LG to downtown TO (i.e a significant %), how many would take a +45min crowded subway ride vs a 29min GO train (which was an "express" option presented in the RH BCA)? And with recent talks about dist-based subway fares, how many more would move to GO?

Fast forward to Spring 2015, and the RH Express Rail was officially dropped by the Prov (with Stouffville and Barrie getting upgraded to RER). Was this political, or logical, or both...it's hard to tell. Stouffville had somewhat low ridership projections and had previously performed poorly when studied for electrified express rail, yet was upgraded. And GO has known about flooding issues in the Lower Don for decades. Although a problem that requires remedying (with or w/out Express Rail) - it's in no way a dealbreaker. Either way, it was dropped. And changing plans to win votes isn't anything new, so perhaps the same happened here.

So while some on this site will argue that RH improvement are a non-starter with little benefit, the preceding reports paint a different picture. For one it has enormous regional importance w/ high projected ridership. Two: it has a solid business case and was an important part of the Big Move/P2G. Three: Metrolinx has shown us very recently in their YRNS and New Station analysis that RER / subway / LRT can all travel in this flood-prone corridor (with some of these shortlisted ideas to be presented later this year). So if we're to trust the experts (Metrolinx), then the experts in this case say improvements to the RH corridor are possible.

TL;DR - It is a complicated issue, and the DRL and its own complexity only adds to this. But at the end of the day people are right to promote GO improvements between Union and RHC, and to question extending Line 1 north of Steeles. The previous reports/data support their argument. Not to mention the historical evidence of ultra-high development, ridership, and transit mode shares projected for previous Centres (like that proposed at RHC/LG) have almost always been way off. This doesn't mean ppl don't support LRT, RER, etc in York Region. It's just that they don't support the subway.

And regardless of whatever is built or not, the DRL was needed 50yrs ago. So thankfully TO's Planning Dept/TTC are doing a good job in finally planning/prioritizing it. I personally don't think one cent should be spent on Yonge capacity improvements if that money could otherwise go to a DRL.

 

[Translude15]

But let's be clear on where are: We have a subway extension we KNOW will be hugely successful in terms of addressing current ridership and generating future ridership and significant intensification. Those things are all great and more than can be said for pretty much any transit project now under consideration. That most certainly includes Scarborough as well as Spadina.

In which case, what's the harm in delaying said hugely successful subway extension to address the current capacity issues within the central core first? Or rather, ensuring the DRL and YNSE are built in conjunction with each other? Either way, a Yonge extension is secondary to the DRL and not simply because of capacity issues. If you can't see the logic behind that, well, go pour some milk over your head, bub.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

So? It is also the choice of your region to choose to develop in a way that requires a subway extension. You don't seem to have a problem with unilateral decisions when it is in your favour.

AoD

You know, on my subway ride home I was thinking that maybe it isn't such a good idea to be concentrating any more urban development on Yonge. Yonge capacity is gonna top off at 36k pphpd, and when it does again reach that point, it's not clear how we'd be able to deal with that crowding. Concentrating transit-orientated-development on a transit corridor we know will continue to have crowding issues just seems like poor planning.

Are there any other ways it could've been spread out the passenger loads? Perhaps concentrate more development at Vaughan Centre, to feed the below capacity University Line, while restricting Yonge to midrise residential?

I'm not very familiar with the geography of York Region, which is why I'm asking.

 

[Translude15]

You know, on my subway ride home I was thinking that maybe it isn't such a good idea to be concentrating any more urban development on Yonge. Yonge capacity is gonna top off at 36k pphpd, and when it does again reach that point, it's not clear how we'd be able to deal with that crowding. Concentrating transit-orientated-development on a transit corridor we know will continue to have crowding issues just seems like poor planning.

Are there any other ways it could've been spread out the passenger loads? Perhaps concentrate more development at Vaughan Centre, to feed the below capacity University Line, while restricting Yonge to midrise residential?

I'm not very familiar with the geography of York Region, which is why I'm asking.

York Region already has nodes in development at VCC and Markham in addition to what's planned for Richmond Hill. Part of the problem is each "centre" is representative of three separate municipalities with each one vying for its own sense of identity. You know what would spread York Region passenger loads away from the Yonge though? A DRL up to Sheppard or Finch!

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

If York Region is so eager to have the Yonge Subway extension, why isn't Peel Region (Mississauga more so than Brampton) so eager about extending the Bloor Subway into Mississauga? Doesn't Peel Region have a larger population than York Region?

Dude, get a map.

So? It is also the choice of your region to choose to develop in a way that requires/demands a subway extension. You don't seem to have a problem with unilateral decisions when it is in your favour - and I might add Toronto have a better case for doing so - it is their infrastructure and they aren't sucking off York Region to do it.

No understanding of planning.
First, we WANT suburbs to build development that does not require cars.
Second, the PROVINCE mandated where they grow and the PROVINCE allotted population targets.
Third, the market intensifies in prime locations, especially along transportation routes.

The region isn't CHOOSING to develop that way. It's the provincial law. Jeeze.
As for "sucking off York Region," I guess you took Economic Development courses where you took Planning Law? It's one region. The only difference is where your tax dollars go. If the transportation system in York Region tanks, Toronto won't be sitting pretty and vice versa. It's in everyone's mutual interest to find solutions to all this.

I haven't advocated for any unilateral decisions. There was the one time I thought everyone in Ontario should change their name to "Justin Bieber" but it was short-lived and I never posted it here.

It's like someone siphoning off another city's water treatment plant because they're far from the lake and without a water source of their own, and then when the combined demand exceeds the possible supply, cries that their urban expansion must continue come hell or high water.

Are you being ironic or do you actually not know where York Region's water supply comes from or how its capacity is distributed or that they were at a major bottleneck about 5 years ago?

That's impetulance.

No it's not.
I know because this is not a word in the English language.

In which case, what's the harm in delaying said hugely successful subway extension to address the current capacity issues within the central core first? Or rather, ensuring the DRL and YNSE are built in conjunction with each other?

I'm 100% fine with them being built together and have said so, multiple times.
I've also said I think everything will be fine if Yonge goes first, since it's closer to being ready, so long as DRL is right behind it. I've never said it should be built without any DRL plans.

And there wasn't a harm in delaying - in 2009 when it first came up. Toronto has dithered for 7 years. Now it's causing harm.

How do you like that cup of milk on your head, ,bub?
(Seriously - a cup of milk on my head? Is that a thing? Or are you being impetulant with me?!)

Are there any other ways it could've been spread out the passenger loads? Perhaps concentrate more development at Vaughan Centre, to feed the below capacity University Line, while restricting Yonge to midrise residential?

I'm not very familiar with the geography of York Region, which is why I'm asking.

It's a fair question - and it's part of the reason they're trying to develop nodes to the east and west. But you can only do so much with policy to force people where to live. Development is gravitating to Yonge Street and probably always will.