[micheal_can]

This is literally how we got all of our existing subway system. None of the subways had enough ridership to justify them when they opened. When the Yonge Line opened in 1954, all of the stations were more than twice as long as the trains that stopped in them (off-peak trains were often two cars long, which is the equivalent of one and a half T-series cars), and there were brownouts because the city barely had enough electricity to run the subway.

What's wrong with GTA transit is that we keep allowing the bulk of our residential development to go into places where transit can't support them - think of CityPlace, Liberty Village and Humber Bay today, and Thorncliffe Park, Flemingdon Park, Don Mills & Sheppard, West Hill, Jane & Finch, Dixon Road back when they were built.

How do you fix it? There is a desperate need for affordable housing. There is a desperate need for housing near transit.

 

[amnesiajune]

How do you fix it? There is a desperate need for affordable housing. There is a desperate need for housing near transit.

Build more transit. We have the money to do it, we just don't have the will to spend that money.

Also, frankly, transit should be done the way Metrolinx does it - commit to a project, spend a little more, sign a contract with a private sector company, and put all of the responsibility on their shoulders. None of the BS from Toronto City Council where any project has to come back for more debate and another vote several times before it can actually be built, and the city ends up paying for the cost of the delays that their slow construction process results in.

It's no coincidence that Toronto's big transit projects happened when Metro Council (the body that oversaw them) wasn't directly elected by voters - councillors were elected by the individual city councils, and the chairman was appointed by the provincial government.

 

[micheal_can]

Build more transit. We have the money to do it, we just don't have the will to spend that money.

Also, frankly, transit should be done the way Metrolinx does it - commit to a project, spend a little more, sign a contract with a private sector company, and put all of the responsibility on their shoulders. None of the BS from Toronto City Council where any project has to come back for more debate and another vote several times before it can actually be built, and the city ends up paying for the cost of the delays that their slow construction process results in.

It's no coincidence that Toronto's big transit projects happened when Metro Council (the body that oversaw them) wasn't directly elected by voters - councillors were elected by the individual city councils, and the chairman was appointed by the provincial government.

Where is this magical money? Toronto is broke. Ontario is broke. The country is Broke.

 

[rbt]

Where is this magical money? Toronto is broke. Ontario is broke. The country is Broke.

Agreed with the first 2. "The country is Broke. is very false. Canada can trivially boost revenues by $20B/year by boosting the GST back to previous levels and not have a measurable impact on the economy (we know this because the gain from the cut was not measurable). Ontario also plenty of room to move on both personal and commercial income tax both of which are in the lowest 2 provinces and lower than most US states (if you include healthcare fees) we compete against.

We, as the public, choose for our governments to be fiscally constrained. It's a choice, not a necessity.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Originally there were stations at both Centre and Royal Orchard. Both of those were dropped because of low ridership, as well as to allow tunnelling under the Don River instead of building a new Yonge Street bridge. Right now there are essentially two intermediate stops in York Region, and neither seems likely to be dropped unless the Langstaff Gateway plans are also dropped.

If there is a station that would be dropped, Cummer would seem like the more likely one to me, just because it's relatively close to Finch. Also remember that this is a project driven by York Region and the provincial government, not Toronto. Toronto's only major interest in this is Relief Line funding.



It makes no sense to drop the underground bus terminal if the Steeles BRT is still a priority for the city. The buses need to connect to the subway very easily and get across Yonge as quickly as possible, and the way that's done is with an underground bus terminal.

Well they will have to build it in 2030 anyway because of the condos going up on the line.

I think Royal Orchard was still viable in terms of future development, however, the cost savings for foregoing a bridge and not building the station allowed the line's price-tag to reflect considerable savings when compared to the ridership it would generate. Not to say that ridership wouldn't justify it in a more geographically favourable context. I would personally still want a royal orchard station as it would allow connecting routes along Centre, Royal Orchard and John to connect to it, although they can also connect at Clark Station further south.

Viva will still have to run if there is only 2 stops in YR. The point of the subway was to replace Viva south of 7.

Building stations based on future development potential versus building stations based on existing demands is what's wrong with GTA transit.

Bingo!

 

[amnesiajune]

Where is this magical money? Toronto is broke. Ontario is broke. The country is Broke.

Toronto's annual GDP is $350 billion. Ontario's GDP is $800 billion. Canada's is $2.1 trillion. We're not broke at all.

Viva will still have to run if there is only 2 stops in YR. The point of the subway was to replace Viva south of 7.

They'd probably do something like the TTC does on Yonge, Sheppard and Eglinton - keep an infrequent local bus alongside the underground trains.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Building a subway line (or other transit infrastructure) to "nowhere" hoping development will pop up is folly.
Building a subway to a place to where policy and the market are already driving growth is good planning. And, as already pointed out, it's a huge part of what made the current TTC network, devised by Metro, a model lauded around the world. What changed is that Metro effectively got built out and no one kept the project going when growth kept going in the Regional Municipalities.

(Bear in mind that literally no urban development goes on without roads and connections to the transportation network. So it seems counter-intuitive that making transit a pre-requisite is a fundamental problem. I think it's the opposite, mode aside. That we've failed to keep up, having transit ready to go in tandem with growth, is where we've failed.)

Clark and Royal Orchard were not "planned" stations that were cut. They were proposed stations that didn't make the cut.
I think it's highly unlikely anything else would be cut. In theory you could MAYBE ditch Cummer and Clark but both have buses feeding in and both because of the Newtonbrook plan and on principle, I'm sure Toronto wouldn't let Cummer get axed. Perhaps YR would be willing to ditch Clark if it was the make-or-break factor in the subway getting built but what are the odds that will happen?

I'm curious, actually, where the Yonge North Secondary Plan is at. It looks like they did most of the work and then never brought it to council. A cynic miiiiight suggest they did it to undermine the extension proposal (by not wanting to provide a planning rationale for a project they didn't want) but it could be something far more innocuous; other priorities etc. But the lack of it isn't stopping major intensification on the Toronto side of Steeles.

And to reiterate what others have said above; we're plenty wealthy enough to build more transit and 1-cent of the GST would be a big step in that direction. So too would have been the province not chickening out on ditching revenue tools (which could have directed funds specifically to Metrolinx and fundamentally changed the balance of power). To not to do is a choice, and it's what our politicians - elected by us - have been choosing for a couple of generations now.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

Neither. Was more trying to put the decisions behind two extensions in perspective (in a general sense), not attempting to make 1:1 comparisons of their respective merit. But on the whole, for one project at least we got to weigh a highly competitive and similarly-priced alternative.

I am sorry. You are not making any sense.

There is no alternative for a 1:1 comparison between transit alternatives on YNSE because the ridership of YNSE will exceed any alternative options on DAY 1!!!

If we built an LRT, we would have to build a grade-separated LRT that would be at peak capacity from day 1.

That is the reason why I differentiated from YNSE as a whole and the section north of Steeles. The section north of Steeles can merit LRT/RT alternatives alone (and I would accept that argument were you making it), but there are other consideration here such as buy-in (we want York Region to subsidize part of the construction cost, and motivate Queens Park to fund part of it and the necessary Relief Line), the unnecessary traveling cost of a transfer, York Region's provincially mandated growth plans, and that a grade-separated LRT won't be cheap anyway.

There is no comparison to be made at all with the Scarborough Subway. None.

What we are observing here, is a subway plan that has planning merit (If not for downstream capacity constraints on Yonge). A rarity in this region, I know.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

If there is a station that would be dropped, Cummer would seem like the more likely one to me, just because it's relatively close to Finch.

I regret it if that were the case.

I think NYCC station has proven the viability that a station on Cummer would have. I would rather repeat NYCC than Yonge&Blythwood here.

 

[Hopkins123]

Toronto's annual GDP is $350 billion. Ontario's GDP is $800 billion. Canada's is $2.1 trillion. We're not broke at all.

Thank you for stating what I've known for awhile now. Canada is the 9th wealthiest economy in the world out of 190+ nations. Why we're settling for mediocrity and piecemeal additions to the rapid transit network is pitiful.

 

[amnesiajune]

I think NYCC station has proven the viability that a station on Cummer would have. I would rather repeat NYCC than Yonge&Blythwood here.

NYCC is definitely different since it was built pre-amalgamation, but I don't disagree with you. What I would hope for is that the Cummer station is built north of the street, so that no part of that stretch of Yonge is more than 500 meters away from a station entrance.

 

[Leo_Chan]

If Lawrence East infill Station costs $500m to make accommodations for, then how much would Clark and Langstaff infill Stations cost?

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

If Lawrence East infill Station costs $500m to make accommodations for, then how much would Clark and Langstaff infill Stations cost?

Not a fair comparison.

Scarborough Subway has to be very very very deep due to soil conditions. Lawrence East in particular, sits on a ravine system.

Langstaff will be an important station, so it might be a little costly (though I suppose there is a potential to get developers to cover some of the cost?). Clark Station should be no more expensive than the average Crosstown underground station, I suppose.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Toronto's annual GDP is $350 billion. Ontario's GDP is $800 billion. Canada's is $2.1 trillion. We're not broke at all.



They'd probably do something like the TTC does on Yonge, Sheppard and Eglinton - keep an infrequent local bus alongside the underground trains.

From all indications, we are getting the basic bus service and not much else. Which means those stations will have to be built later. smh.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

I am sorry. You are not making any sense.

There is no alternative for a 1:1 comparison between transit alternatives on YNSE because the ridership of YNSE will exceed any alternative options on DAY 1!!!

That dude never makes sense. It's like he's trying to argue that it's the same thing to READ a book and to play a REED instrument. The two projects are only similar at the most superficial level and yet he persists; the "rhetoric" is similar. Whatever. In terms of the planning context, the geography, development potential and ridership they're apples and oranges. Maybe apples and celery. As I've said before, find me a developer who would trade a parcel of land at Yonge/Steeles for one at STC. The fact they're both suburban underground heavy rail is near meaningless.

As for station locations, those are already in the TPAP (though subject to refinement). Langstaff won't be infill because they need it for the parking (and it's where the first phase of development will be. Indeed, it's starting already, at the planning level). Cummer will basically right under the intersection but kind of leaning towards the north...

And, since I have the document open - Steeles:

Clark:

Langstaff:

and RHC: