[Haydenpoon]

The senior government source, to whom the Star agreed to grant anonymity in order to discuss plans not yet made public, said two of the options in Metrolinx’s new report would keep the line underground. But under a third proposal, the extension would veer east of Yonge in the vicinity of Kirk Drive in Thornhill, and then run north above ground alongside the CN rail corridor that cuts through York Region.

Going all the way to Bayview may be overkill. I think it will look more like this.

 

[ARG1]

It would not be under Yonge all the way to Kirk, and then turning 90 degrees and running under Kirk. They would tilt east gently, starting soon after Clark and running diagonally to reach the rail corridor.

That's kind of what I'm assuming as well but it still feels like an extremely wide detour that won't end up saving that much money, especially considering its only reducing the tunnel length by 1km. Before I make a proper decision, frankly I'd rather first see the full details of what is being proposed but I think a much smarter money saving tactic would be to cut some of the stations such as Langstaff which are arguably not needed.

 

[Coolstar]

So say we surface the line at RHC. What about the proposed underground yard that was supposed to be north of the station?

 

[Haydenpoon]

So say we surface the line at RHC. What about the proposed underground yard that was supposed to be north of the station?

Actually, why was the yard underground in the first place, just to put staff parking on top?

 

[Haydenpoon]

That's kind of what I'm assuming as well but it still feels like an extremely wide detour that won't end up saving that much money, especially considering its only reducing the tunnel length by 1km. Before I make a proper decision, frankly I'd rather first see the full details of what is being proposed but I think a much smarter money saving tactic would be to cut some of the stations such as Langstaff which are arguably not needed.

Yonge St between Finch and Clark is actually quite wide, wider than Overlea Blvd where the Ontario Line will run above ground. Maybe we also make Finch to Clark aboveground? That will reduce the tunnel section to just 4 km.

 

[Northern Light]

Having the Steeles Bus terminal above ground makes perfect sense. The south-west corner of Yonge & Steeles hosts a large parking lot, that was underused even in pre-Covid times. Why dig a terminal when a surface location is readily available.

The detour .. depends on the details, but at least it is worth considering.

Given the intensification proposed at Yonge/Steeles I can't support the bus terminal, as envisaged at grade.

Its monstrously large.

I could certainly support a drastic reduction in its size, irrespective of whether its at grade or sub-surface.

That said, any bus terminal needs to be built assuming that Yonge/Steeles will be hi-rise on every corner and that we want an animated street front with retail.

That precludes at a terminal of any scale at grade.

Something down in the 4-6 Bay range might be concealed in a large building; but what's envisioned currently is much larger.

So I consider that quite problematic.

 

[Northern Light]

Yonge St between Finch and Clark is actually quite wide, wider than Overlea Blvd where the Ontario Line will run above ground. Maybe we also make Finch to Clark aboveground? That will reduce the tunnel section to just 4 km.

Surfacing the Yonge Line in the middle of Yonge? LOL

Don't get me wrong, I'm amused.

But I don't see it flying.

Remember these stations are much larger than those proposed on the Ontario Line.

It would take a considerable distance for the Yonge Line to surface from the end of the current tail track.

I would imagine it would create some real complexity in terms of Cummer Station.

Also, how are you fitting the bus terminal in the middle of Yonge?

 

[Northern Light]

Yeah, but I suspect it would be a tiny fraction of the cost of digging a large hole in the ground and filling it with concrete and construction steel.

Centerpoint is already zoned for......several large towers.

You're not going to pay for current use; you would pay for highest, best, zoned for use.

 

[Haydenpoon]

Surfacing the Yonge Line in the middle of Yonge? LOL

Don't get me wrong, I'm amused.

But I don't see it flying.

Remember these stations are much larger than those proposed on the Ontario Line.

It would take a considerable distance for the Yonge Line to surface from the end of the current tail track.

I would imagine it would create some real complexity in terms of Cummer Station.

Also, how are you fitting the bus terminal in the middle of Yonge?

The stations are longer, not necessarily larger in width. There are many elevated stations in the world > 120 m.

Of course, the bus terminal will be off Yonge St, not in the middle of Yonge.

 

[Rainforest]

Given the intensification proposed at Yonge/Steeles I can't support the bus terminal, as envisaged at grade.

Its monstrously large.

I could certainly support a drastic reduction in its size, irrespective of whether its at grade or surface.

That said, any bus terminal needs to be built assuming that Yonge/Steeles will be hi-rise on every corner and that we want an animated street front with retail.

That precludes at a terminal of any scale at grade.

Something down in the 4-6 Bay range might be concealed in a large building; but what's envisioned currently is much larger.

So I consider that quite problematic.

Does the Steeles bus terminal really need to be bigger than the York Mills / Wilson bus terminal? Both serve busy streets with their frequent bus routes, but are not / will not be terminal stations.

The York Mills bus terminal sits comfortably under a highrise, and that does not seem to cause any problems.

Or we can look at the Sheppard and Finch bus terminals; both are at the surface / open air, not even under highrises, and they do not take away from the street liveliness. Yonge street near Sheppard and Finch sees much more pedestrian activity than Yonge Street at Lawrence with its underground bus terminal.

 

[syn]

The headline was definitely encouraging. Doesn't seem like a major change. Hopefully they're far more aggressive with cost savings on this extension, and making wise investments where they're actually needed.

 

[mdu]

Does the Steeles bus terminal really need to be bigger than the York Mills / Wilson bus terminal? Both serve busy streets with their frequent bus routes, but are not / will not be terminal stations.

The York Mills bus terminal sits comfortably under a highrise, and that does not seem to cause any problems.

Or we can look at the Sheppard and Finch bus terminals; both are at the surface / open air, not even under highrises, and they do not take away from the street liveliness. Yonge street near Sheppard and Finch sees much more pedestrian activity than Yonge Street at Lawrence with its underground bus terminal.

There's still a few YRT busses that would likely still run down to Steeles and then towards the station (2, 91, 88, 99), but I assume fare-paid zone considerations will result in separate terminals.

 

[Northern Light]

Does the Steeles bus terminal really need to be bigger than the York Mills / Wilson bus terminal? Both serve busy streets with their frequent bus routes, but are not / will not be terminal stations.

The York Mills bus terminal sits comfortably under a highrise, and that does not seem to cause any problems.

Or we can look at the Sheppard and Finch bus terminals; both are at the surface / open air, not even under highrises, and they do not take away from the street liveliness. Yonge street near Sheppard and Finch sees much more pedestrian activity than Yonge Street at Lawrence with its underground bus terminal.

This report called for a 'smaller' Steeles terminal than originally envisioned..............at 16 bus bays.

https://www.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Commission_reports_and_information/Commission_meetings/2012/May_1/Reports/Yonge_Subway_Extenti.pdf

My instinct is that that remains overkill.

But its all I have to go on, in terms of the land area implications of a terminal at grade.

In respect of comparisons to other stations, York Mills is 2 different terminals as I recollect, and the surface environment despite being covered by buildings is atrocious.

Sheppard is not directly on Yonge; and is due to be built over, the hold-up there has been the City's desire for commercial space over top rather than residential.

Finch is 2 different terminals and occupies an obscene amount of land, but was built in behind existing retail on Yonge.

Not sure I see any of these as ideal role models.

 

[Rainforest]

This report called for a 'smaller' Steeles terminal than originally envisioned..............at 16 bus bays.

https://www.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Commission_reports_and_information/Commission_meetings/2012/May_1/Reports/Yonge_Subway_Extenti.pdf

My instinct is that that remains overkill.

But its all I have go on, in terms of the land area implications of a terminal at grade.

In respect of comparisons to other stations, York Mills is 2 different terminals as I recollect, and the surface environment despite being covered by buildings is atrocious.

Sheppard is not directly on Yonge; and is due to be built over, the hold-up there has been the City's desire for commercial space over top rather than residential.

Finch is 2 different terminals and occupies an obscene amount of land, but was built in behind existing retail on Yonge.

Not sure I see any of these as ideal role models.

York Mills has one TTC terminal and one GO terminal. Finch, one TTC terminal and one VIVA/YRT/GO terminal.

The surface environment at York Mills is just fine. If anything, it is constrained by the hills and by the TTC parking lot at the north-western corner. The bus terminals do not affect the surface.

At Steeles, the Centerpoint parking lot extends very far west, and the mall itself will probably get demolished and rebuilt. That leaves plenty of options to place the new bus terminal either under a commercial building or behind some retail, and not directly at the street corner. We probably want some commercial buildings and not just condos; people need to shop somewhere.

Maybe a fully underground terminal is preferable in some ways; I am just not sure that advantage is big enough to justify the extra cost.

 

[Allandale25]

But under a third proposal, the extension would veer east of Yonge in the vicinity of Kirk Drive in Thornhill, and then run north above ground alongside the CN rail corridor that cuts through York Region.

I realize it's a small thing, but I wish the writer would have added that this is the north-south CN Rail corridor through York Region and the same section of track the Richmond Hill GO train line uses, given there is another CN rail corridor that goes through York Region (the York Sub). Also, what about the federal regulations about heavy rail and lighter rail running near each other? I guess Metrolinx is getting some experience with this through their Ontario Line study process...

How wide is the Bala Sub in this location? It just looks a little tight here with the cemetary on either side. I guess it's hard to see the property lines with the trees in the way. I guess it would be similar to how Line 2 goes beside the CP line near Kipling (image below).