[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Seems like we're in our current mess for the complete opposite reason you wrote. That we didn't build a radial system branching out from our CBD.

Toronto does not have a radial system where the entire transit network feeds into Union? Do tell. Explain to the class and use small words for the rest of us.

Here are some pictures, to help you illustrate:

The notion is especially amusing coming from someone who argues an improved GO train, which does nothing but funnel 905 riders into the CBD, is really all that's needed here. (I know that's not all you say about the corridor but it still amuses me. )

Ah, I see. Last page you insulted Steve and basically insinuated he's a biased liar, called him an "armchair engineer", but now rely on past quotes of his to save face on your own armchair engineer-edness. Funny, I don't see him saying it's technically impossible to tunnel under Yonge, and the quote he was replying to was about a line "within 100m of the existing subway" (not below the subway).

I don't pretend to be an engineer. I've seen various explanations over the years for why an extra Yonge line is not feasible and his was the first I came across. Build another one underneath - I don't care. I said I support the idea on principle and if someone can show it wouldn't cost $50B and take 20 years, I'm down with that.

I've also been consistent in terms of what I like and don't about Munro - He knows a lot of stuff, undoubtedly, but he's too hung up on technicalities and not enough on practical realities. NEVER said he's a liar but, with no actual pro expertise, gets cited as an unbiased expert when he has biases (downtown centric, hates Metrolinx etc.) like anyone else. Ergo "armchair engineer," ergo his comments on this matter I have no trouble citing any more than I other "expert" I found quickly on Google. If someone has more accurate info from a professional about the viability of tunneling below Yonge, I'd be happy to read it.

but thanks for coming back. We missed your helpful analysis.

EDIT: Hey - speaking of Steve, here is on Yonge capacity. Say what you will about the man, he's clearly not lacking in free time!

https://stevemunro.ca/2016/07/07/the-dwindling-capacity-of-the-yonge-subway/

 

[44 North]

Toronto does not have a radial system where the entire transit network feeds into Union? Do tell. Explain to the class and use small words for the rest of us.

Here are some pictures, to help you illustrate:

The notion is especially amusing coming from someone who argues an improved GO train, which does nothing but funnel 905 riders into the CBD, is really all that's needed here. (I know that's not all you say about the corridor but it still amuses me. )



I don't pretend to be an engineer. I've seen various explanations over the years for why an extra Yonge line is not feasible and his was the first I came across. Build another one underneath - I don't care. I said I support the idea on principle and if someone can show it wouldn't cost $50B and take 20 years, I'm down with that.

I've also been consistent in terms of what I like and don't about Munro - He knows a lot of stuff, undoubtedly, but he's too hung up on technicalities and not enough on practical realities. NEVER said he's a liar but, with no actual pro expertise, gets cited as an unbiased expert when he has biases (downtown centric, hates Metrolinx etc.) like anyone else. Ergo "armchair engineer," ergo his comments on this matter I have no trouble citing any more than I other "expert" I found quickly on Google. If someone has more accurate info from a professional about the viability of tunneling below Yonge, I'd be happy to read it.

but thanks for coming back. We missed your helpful analysis.

EDIT: Hey - speaking of Steve, here is on Yonge capacity. Say what you will about the man, he's clearly not lacking in free time!

https://stevemunro.ca/2016/07/07/the-dwindling-capacity-of-the-yonge-subway/

The discussion and quote of yours I posted was about subways, and Line 2 doesn't go through the CBD. At the time of its construction it bypassed what is known as downtown (going through today an area that isn't part of the CBD).

I'd say Munro is one of the best individuals to turn to for "practical analysis". He sees through BS, whether it's from Mlinx, TTC, politicians, or bureaucrats. And so far he's been pretty on the mark. York Region has already updated their wonky website in light of his so-called unprofessional hateful biases.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

The discussion and quote of yours I posted was about subways, and Line 2 doesn't go through the CBD. At the time of its construction it bypassed what is known as downtown (and today isn't part of the CBD).

Oh, lordy. A radial system does not require that EVERY SINGLE line terminate in the CBD. It merely needs to flow peak traffic in that direction and even if Bloor is north of the CBD, the line's purpose is obviously to help people get to the YUS line, not to travel from Etobicoke to Scarborough.

The entire system's flaw is the pinch point at Bloor, as you surely know, and the DRL is designed to alleviate that - by providing an alternative to Union Station.
The GTA's transit system is radial. Period.

I'd say Munro is one of the best individuals to turn to for "practical analysis". He sees through BS, whether it's from Mlinx, TTC, politicians, or bureaucrats. And so far he's been pretty on the mark. York Region has already updated their wonky website in light of his so-called unprofessional hateful biases.

I agree that he is one of the best such individuals and I want to reiterate - per your accusation - I've never once implied he's a liar. I also didn't call him "hateful," though I think it's a pretty clear matter of record, his disdain for Metrolinx. I just think he has his limits and people tend to treat his word as gospel and he thinks he's the only one who knows anything. But I've never said he's stupid or lacks knowledge or does not add value. He's just a technocrat who needs to be sprinkled with a few grains of salt. (The double-counting of ATC on York's website was a 100% fair criticism and probably more of a blunder on their part than a deliberate lie but he caught it and it's fixed. Kudos to all.)

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

I love Don Mills! I went to school on Don Mills! I like Fairview Mall! I have fond memories of the Peanut!

But it's a terrible place for a subway north of Sheppard. Yes, Seneca is at Finch and there's a very few condo towers but then it's all mature suburban hoods; there is no corridor for intensification whereas Yonge is (obviously) active and, more to the point, designated as a mixed-use corridor in every planning document - including Toronto's, by the way.

I have no problem at all with the DRL going to Sheppard. I just think:
-It was Metrolinx's idea, not Toronto's
-It's not happening in the short term

But if I had a fantasy map? Yeah ,sure - it'd go there and the Sheppard line would connect to Downsview, while I'm at it.
But you also shouldn't labour under the illusion that building the DRL to Sheppard over, I dunno, the course of the next 25 years, will slow or stop the condo development marching north on Yonge, from 401 to Major Mac. The Bloor capacity issues will look like nothing if you keep adding those people without adequate transportation infrastructure. As much as you ALL CAPS declare the subway is at capacity at Yonge/Bloor, so too is the Yonge/Steeles road intersection, and it has been for years. Adding another 10,000 residents over the next decade (at least) without a subway just means you're"solving" one problem and creating another.

In the meantime, I'd suggest that while downtown is always going to be the main job centre (I include hypothetical Unilever in that), there are also suburban job centres and great value in nurturing that. If nothing else, it fosters both reverse commuting and giving suburbanites places to work that are closer to home. You can't keep building a radial system that only funnels people into downtown. That's why we're in this mess in the first place (that we built it and then failed to augment and expand it through the 80s and 90s, particularly).

I think it is worth re-posting my own fantasy vision for the DRL in this discussion:

Run the Relief Line to Finch and Don Mills, the last node north of Sheppard with good development potential + Seneca College. North of Finch, veer west on the Finch Hydro Corridor to the Richmond Hill GO line. Use that alignment to a terminus with the Yonge North Subway Extension at Highway 7.

No more need for Richmond Hill GO line (which needs a costly realignment anyway if we want to convert it to GO-RER). Relief to the Yonge line is maximized, intercepting Finch and Steeles East buses. York Region can take the Yonge line to destinations in North York and Midtown, and the more express-like Relief Line to destinations downtown.

While we are at it, I would convert the Finch Hydro Corridor and the now unused Richmond Hill GO corridor south of Finch into Toronto's first cycling superhighway.

 

[minilude]

I think it is worth re-posting my own fantasy vision for the DRL in this discussion:

Run the Relief Line to Finch and Don Mills, the last node north of Sheppard with good development potential + Seneca College. North of Finch, veer west on the Finch Hydro Corridor to the Richmond Hill GO line. Use that alignment to a terminus with the Yonge North Subway Extension at Highway 7.

No more need for Richmond Hill GO line (which needs a costly realignment anyway if we want to convert it to GO-RER). Relief to the Yonge line is maximized, intercepting Finch and Steeles East buses. York Region can take the Yonge line to destinations in North York and Midtown, and the more express-like Relief Line to destinations downtown.

While we are at it, I would convert the Finch Hydro Corridor and the now unused Richmond Hill GO corridor south of Finch into Toronto's first cycling superhighway.

I always think the potential of Richmond Hill GO will be the "second" yonge line, but it must offer express service to attract passengers off the main yonge line (from the burbs to Union/Queen/King only, it does not attract ridership who goes to Yonge/Finch, Sheppard, Eglinton, Bloor) . IMO your illustration is very good except we probably don't need John St station. Yonge corridor is massive because of multiple nodes on it.

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/com...st-corridor-cant-handle-more-development.html

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

There's actually some good redevelopment going on at John Street; old industrial sites becoming townhomes. Enough to justify a station? Probably not - but maybe.

The real question, going forward, is the travel patterns from people in this area A prevailing assumption among "All they need is RER" truthers here is that everyone in RH just wants to get down to Union and the CBD but BMO has posted data from the TTS survey showing it's not the case. Unless we expect that to change (and why would we?) it's all the more reason to assume that RER does not ameliorate the need for a subway which travels through the centre of the city.

And I like the 'cycling superhighway' idea for the hydro corridor. They're off to an OK start, though I confess I once tried the section between Bayview and Leslie and the topography nearly killed me. More switchbacks than a Rocky Mountain trail!

 

[minilude]

the ridership from Steeles to Bloor is enough to justify a subway line. Steeles is just not fit to be the terminus so the line has to go a bit north - see the Vaughan line for reasons (which has been discussed many many many times here)

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

I always think the potential of Richmond Hill GO will be the "second" yonge line, but it must offer express service to attract passengers off the main yonge line (from the burbs to Union/Queen/King only, it does not attract ridership who goes to Yonge/Finch, Sheppard, Eglinton, Bloor)

The real question, going forward, is the travel patterns from people in this area A prevailing assumption among "All they need is RER" truthers here is that everyone in RH just wants to get down to Union and the CBD but BMO has posted data from the TTS survey showing it's not the case. Unless we expect that to change (and why would we?) it's all the more reason to assume that RER does not ameliorate the need for a subway which travels through the centre of the city.

Having the DRL replace the RH-GO addresses your concerns I believe.

Offered at the same fare-price as the rest of the subway network, the DRL would be running at high frequencies, must higher than GO-RER. The DRL is also going to be much much faster than the Yonge Subway line, as it is able to travel at much higher average speeds than the Yonge Subway, not to mention having many less stations. It is truly an 'express' service, when compared to the Yonge subway.

Having it connect to York Region's main transit hub at Yonge/Highway-7 means that there is very good reason for York Region commuters to use the DRL when heading to downtown destinations. DRL trains will reach Queen Station much faster than Yonge Line trains. Where GO-RER fails to attract Yonge-bound customers, I believe this line would succeed.

Additionally, the redundancy to the network will be superb.

 

[Cobra]

I think it is worth re-posting my own fantasy vision for the DRL in this discussion:

Run the Relief Line to Finch and Don Mills, the last node north of Sheppard with good development potential + Seneca College. North of Finch, veer west on the Finch Hydro Corridor to the Richmond Hill GO line. Use that alignment to a terminus with the Yonge North Subway Extension at Highway 7.

No more need for Richmond Hill GO line (which needs a costly realignment anyway if we want to convert it to GO-RER). Relief to the Yonge line is maximized, intercepting Finch and Steeles East buses. York Region can take the Yonge line to destinations in North York and Midtown, and the more express-like Relief Line to destinations downtown.

While we are at it, I would convert the Finch Hydro Corridor and the now unused Richmond Hill GO corridor south of Finch into Toronto's first cycling superhighway.

2 subway lines is overkill for Richmond Hill. The DRL above ground North of Steeles is a good idea. As per the Star article, Yonge can't handle more of anything. TTC wants to being it to Steeles. and I think it will happen at some point.

If GO wont make the Richmond Hill line into RER, then converting that stretch in surface subway for the DRL makes more sense

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Wait - now we have the DRL looping from Bloor up to Don Mills/Sheppard and THEN over to Yonge/7? Yeah....I dunno.

the whole point is that GO connects riders to downtown, the Yonge subway connects them to the central city. A DRL kinda doesn't add anything new there. Maybe in a 100-year fantasy map that makes sense but if we're talking about the next 20 years I think DRL to Sheppard + Yonge up to 7 is plenty ambitious enough. If they get the DRL to Bloor by then it'll be a minor miracle for TTC.

 

[Cobra]

Wait - now we have the DRL looping from Bloor up to Don Mills/Sheppard and THEN over to Yonge/7? Yeah....I dunno.

the whole point is that GO connects riders to downtown, the Yonge subway connects them to the central city. A DRL kinda doesn't add anything new there. Maybe in a 100-year fantasy map that makes sense but if we're talking about the next 20 years I think DRL to Sheppard + Yonge up to 7 is plenty ambitious enough. If they get the DRL to Bloor by then it'll be a minor miracle for TTC.

The York Region subway is so far off that at some point new studies will be required and they will come to the same conclusion.

Yonge can't take it.
They will be looking at alternatives.

Fast-tracking RER?
DRL as an alternative?

The TTC will take the Yonge line to Steeles eventually. I'm starting to doubt that the Yonge Line will ever go beyond Steeles. Not because of borders, but because of capacity. It just can't handle it. We all thought that the DRL would solve the issue but now we know it won't in the long term.

Again, 2 extra subway lines won't happen in Richmond Hill

 

[44 North]

Oh, lordy. A radial system does not require that EVERY SINGLE line terminate in the CBD. It merely needs to flow peak traffic in that direction and even if Bloor is north of the CBD, the line's purpose is obviously to help people get to the YUS line, not to travel from Etobicoke to Scarborough.

The entire system's flaw is the pinch point at Bloor, as you surely know, and the DRL is designed to alleviate that - by providing an alternative to Union Station.
The GTA's transit system is radial. Period.

Never said every single line, but surely more than one line is needed to make a radial. A lot of wheelwrights would be out of a job if they tried to pass off a single spoke as being structurally sound. Again, the subway system (which is what's being discussed) is far from a radial. We have one line going through the CBD, so clearly our problem isn't that we 'kept building a radial system that only funnels riders downtown' (as per your assertion). I'd say it's kinda the opposite - that instead of actually building a radial system, we spent too much time trying to "foster" nonexistent commuting patterns to nonexistent locales by way of politicized planning of our top-heavy threadbare system. Had we not listened to politicians and faulty projections (and instead augmented existing commuting patterns), we probably wouldn't have this point-to-point situation of helping/forcing "people get to the [over-capacity] YUS".

I agree that he is one of the best such individuals and I want to reiterate - per your accusation - I've never once implied he's a liar. I also didn't call him "hateful," though I think it's a pretty clear matter of record, his disdain for Metrolinx. I just think he has his limits and people tend to treat his word as gospel and he thinks he's the only one who knows anything. But I've never said he's stupid or lacks knowledge or does not add value. He's just a technocrat who needs to be sprinkled with a few grains of salt. (The double-counting of ATC on York's website was a 100% fair criticism and probably more of a blunder on their part than a deliberate lie but he caught it and it's fixed. Kudos to all.)

I agree York Region's double counting is a blunder, but wouldn't doubt it being deliberate. That wasn't the first time they've tried to underscore downstream capacity issues, and it won't be the last. If this biased salt-sprinkled "armchair engineer" didn't point it out, who would've corrected York Region in their attempts at passing off mistruths?

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Never said every single line, but surely more than one line is needed to make a radial. A lot of wheelwrights would be out of a job if they tried to pass off a single spoke as being structurally sound. Again, the subway system (which is what's being discussed) is far from a radial.

Oh, man. We only HAVE 2 subway lines, for all intents and purposes. The fact that one runs E/W to funnel people into the N/S line does not disprove that the larger system is radial. The bus lines also feed into the subway, because that's how the system was designed. You can't ignore the existence of GO to make your point either.

It's great that I can take the subway from Finch to Downsview if I'm bored but OBVIOUSLY the point of it is to get me heading towards downtown. The system converges at, and emanates from Union Station.

(The main function of the SRT and Sheppard is also to funnel people into the YUS. We all know this.)


The entire GTA transit system is designed around peak flows to/from the CBD. I don't see how you're trying to spin things otherwise.

We have one line going through the CBD, so clearly our problem isn't that we 'kept building a radial system that only funnels riders downtown' (as per your assertion). I'd say it's kinda the opposite - that instead of actually building a radial system, we spent too much time trying to "foster" nonexistent commuting patterns to nonexistent locales by way of politicized planning of our top-heavy threadbare system.

I get that you are saying this. It's wrong.

The system allows to you (to use RH as an example) get to the CBD in the morning and leave it at night. Off-peak travel is impossible. East/west travel is difficult. Travel anywhere between the two terminals is difficult. Why? Because it's a RADIAL system. Come on, please.

The opposite of a radial system? No - it's the opposite of the opposite of a radial system. Sometimes you have legit good points and outside the box ideas (sometime too far outside, but still) and sometimes I wonder if you understand basic principles.

The problem is how little redundancy there is (i.e. if your GO train or subway is down, there are virtually no alternatives) and how poorly we've provided corridors for E/W travel and established nodes outside the core. That's why everyone is on YUS. Where else would they go?

I agree York Region's double counting is a blunder, but wouldn't doubt it being deliberate. That wasn't the first time they've tried to underscore downstream capacity issues, and it won't be the last. If this biased salt-sprinkled "armchair engineer" didn't point it out, who would've corrected York Region in their attempts at passing off mistruths?

someone here? I hadn't seen the website when he first pointed out but, believe it or not, I'd also have wondered why they listed signal improvements twice. Was it on purpose? We'll never know. But it was wrong and it's fixed now. Mostly, they are citing real data from real studies. If Munro and you and others want to attack the studies, go for it. But don't blame YR for citing them. Anyone would.

 

[44 North]

I think it is worth re-posting my own fantasy vision for the DRL in this discussion:

Run the Relief Line to Finch and Don Mills, the last node north of Sheppard with good development potential + Seneca College. North of Finch, veer west on the Finch Hydro Corridor to the Richmond Hill GO line. Use that alignment to a terminus with the Yonge North Subway Extension at Highway 7.

I can understand pushing for one or the other, but surely not both. RHC/LG isn't exactly a high-density centre. One of the reasons recent Yonge North reports selectively omit parts of the Big Move and excludes TTC/GO fare integration is that YNSE's ridership drops to below that of Sheppard (and many LRT lines). So it really doesn't make much sense to build two subway lines there, when modeling shows that only one of them will be well-used - that being the express RH route.

 

[RyanM12]

Having both Yonge and DRL terminate at Richmond Hill station is kind of silly. If anything lines are supposed to branch out towards the suburbs, not converge. Taking the DRL from Yonge/7 won't save any time from Line 1, due to it's meandering path to get downtown. It has no value for network building. If the DRL eventually goes north of Sheppard, it should be to spread rapid transit to more people to the city, not just provide more options for a single node. Go north through Seneca to Woodbine/7, Leslie/7 or Warden/7. Otherwise those people will just be taking the bus to Yonge.