[44 North]

I'm not dismissing your whole post (since you made some decent points), but may I ask, how is your most recent fantasy map "been considered in some way", how is it financially or operationally feasible, and what serious problems does it solve other than "it would be interesting to have a branch system"?

Hmm. Did I say every fantasy map ever posted on this site has been considered? No. Read my post again, and by all means debate the other points made, but look closely at the part you quoted. See where it says "many" proposals have been "considered" "in some way"? Did I say any of these were mine, yours, or any other posters specifically? Did I say whether it was the City, TTC, a politician, York Region, Metrolinx, etc who specifically considered something? Did I say they made 1:1 copies of someone's idea? No.

That quote was more to do with things like electrified RER, improved grade-separation for RT lines, less grade-separation for RT lines, consideration of unstudied ideas, conversion of routes to subway/LRT/streetcar right-of-way, new ideas, old ideas...etc. And I posted that image in the DRL thread, and would gladly talk about it in the DRL thread (or the Fantasy thread). Why you bring it up here, now, and ask about specifics is beyond me.

You're a supporter of YNSE and a hanger-on of @TJ Potter, I get it. But please debate the relevant points instead of posting something irrelevant.

 

[salsa]

Hmm. Did I say every fantasy map ever posted on this site has been considered? No. Read my post again, and by all means debate the other points made, but look closely at the part you quoted. See where it says "many" proposals have been "considered" "in some way"? Did I say any of these were mine, yours, or any other posters specifically? Did I say whether it was the City, TTC, a politician, York Region, Metrolinx, etc who specifically considered something? Did I say they made 1:1 copies of someone's idea? No.

That quote was more to do with things like electrified RER, improved grade-separation for RT lines, less grade-separation for RT lines, consideration of unstudied ideas, conversion of routes to subway/LRT/streetcar right-of-way, new ideas, old ideas...etc. And I posted that image in the DRL thread, and would gladly talk about it in the DRL thread (or the Fantasy thread). Why you bring it up here, now, and ask about specifics is beyond me.

You're a supporter of YNSE and a hanger-on of @TJ Potter, I get it. But please debate the relevant points instead of posting something irrelevant.

I see what you mean now. I misread.

 

[TransitBart]

Again, it is also getting them ready for federal funding sooner than later.

Agreed.

 

[TransitBart]

How many more white elephants do you want and how to pay for them?? You got everything backward as well what is needed in your life time at the rate Toronto building things.

The Sheppard line west to Wilson Yard is to allow work trains to get to/from the Yonge Line faster than today at a cost $1 billion if this is the Sheppard relief line. Using this as extension of the existing one will see triple lost than the current one. Far better off building LRT in place of subway on Sheppard until about 2100.

The Sheppard East extension will be triple to 5 times the current lost on the existing white elephant.

Downtown Relief line is #1 all the way to Steeles with a possible of an extension to Hwy 7 down the road.

# 2 is the Yonge extension to Steeles

# 3 is the extension from Kipling to Cloverdale

#4 is the planning on building a new express Yonge Line from Steeles to Queen Quay by Bay St with the possibility going to RH. Starting building the line in 2050 or sooner depending on development on Yonge and how much ridership is remove by the DRL.

#5 is taking the DRL west of University to Jane St that will go north, since Jane can't support surface LRT. Very few stations on Queen with the existing streetcar servicing what it service today between this few stations using current or better headway.

Always very interesting to read everyone's opinion here. Some of us are professionals and some rank amateurs. Count me in the second lot. Here is a link from an interesting article in the Toronto Start today:

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...d-to-get-ahead-of-coming-population-boom.html

I think that 1 to 4 in the list above are pretty much spot on. And I think today's traffic and commute times are intolerable for us, for our families and for our businesses. We have a lot of building to do for today's population. This article outlines the distinct possibility of adding 3.5M people in 20 years. We are discussing Relief Line completion in 15. We had better get quite focussed on making some of this happen sooner rather than later or we are going to be playing catch-up for a long time. That - or we'll all be dead and some businesses and our kids will have moved away, or both.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

The Relief Line to Sheppard needed to be under construction 5 years ago. We're still catching up to the needs of yesteryear.

 

[TransitBart]

The Relief Line to Sheppard needed to be under construction 5 years ago. We're still catching up to the needs of yesteryear.

Not quite. We are discussing catching up which is the first step to taking it seriously. Catching up requires finishing the detailed planning (thank you Ms. Wynne) and then digging deep holes. Memo to John Tory: Put this sticky on your mirror when you are shaving. "REMEMBER to talk to Kathleen and Justin about how many voters will be late for work for the next fifteen years without a RL. Emphasize how a city the size of Toronto needs a NETWORK."

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Not quite. We are discussing catching up which is the first step to taking it seriously. Catching up requires finishing the detailed planning (thank you Ms. Wynne) and then digging deep holes. Memo to John Tory: Put this sticky on your mirror when you are shaving. "REMEMBER to talk to Kathleen and Justin about how many voters will be late for work for the next fifteen years without a RL. Emphasize how a city the size of Toronto needs a NETWORK."

Or, um, a region like the GTA!

Agreed on a terminus at Steeles (just not yet).

You can agree on riding unicorns. It's still never going to happen. and the irony is that the longer this goes, the more politically impossible it becomes, to say nothing of how untenable from a planning perspective.

An unbiased look at YNSE's numbers that takes into consideration the realities of overestimation, past "Centre" development proposals, historical evidence,

We're lucky to have you here for that - the one unbiased guy!

As for the point about YNSE's new yard near 16th Ave, I'd be interested to know how many are even aware of this change in plans. Last TTC estimate I saw pegged the project at $4.6bn (2016), yet recent YR/Mlinx quotes undercut this estimate considerably. Re: the possibility of a station at 16th...frankly I wouldn't doubt it will be added. Nor would I doubt another addendum that has the project terminating even further north.

There's no "change in plans." They did a study to figure out where to put the yard. that was its conclusion. So, to clarify - you think it should end at Steeles but may actually go north of 7. Sure, why not?

You've been writing more or less the same rhetoric for many years. You could be writing it for the next decade. Then it could be another decade before you're ever riding this train.

You realize, I'm sure, you're the pot to my kettle, right? My "dreams" of a subway up to 7 continue to inch ever closer to reality while your visions of Metrorail (or whatever it was) stopping at Steeles recede ever more into the mists of fantasy. I'm not bragging - not any more than if I looked out the window and saw it was dark at night while you went on and on about how much better it would be if only the sun came out at midnight.

You've also put considerable effort into insulting people and their "fantasy maps", trying to ensure that the Big Move 1.0 is carved in stone and will be built as envisioned.

a) surprisingly little effort but I'm good at being thorough
b) I never said that about Big Move 1.0 but I know you have to play that tune at every show, like how the Stones do Satisfaction. I wouldn't mind one concert where they didn't. Same goes for you.

But just for the 1000th time: I expect it to change, obviously plans change blah blah blah. But then you have to admit this project has NOT changed over a DECADE. it's still a subway, it's still going to Highway 7, it's still obviously a priority for the province and the region and is on the books with the city and there is no indication it's shifting any time soon.

Who cares what UTers propose? Crikey - you're arguing as if these things exist in the real world. I can spend all day devising trades I just KNOW the Blue Jays should make to win the pennant this year but I dont' work for the owners or the president or the GM and real people do and they don't care what I think. They're the professionals and they have their own maps and those are the only ones that count. This is just talk radio.
It's a great forum for discussing stuff and thinking outside the box, but a little perspective, please.

You argue those who think Steeles is an optimal/realistic terminus must move on from such fantastical beliefs. But again it could be 20yrs before anyone is riding a subway on Yonge north of Steeles.

I'd guess 10-15 but it's a red herring. It doesn't make sense from a political or planning perspective. Did you know that in the term "fantasy map," that FANTASY is an adjective that modifies the noun, MAP? Stop trying to explain to me that your fantasy is as viable as my reality. It just is not, even if it actually made sense and was a better idea than what's happening in reality.

Raise a reasonable question and I'll acknowledge it but I'm not ceding my grasp on reality to give equal weight to hypotheticals.

the modeling? Fine, it needs to be updated. But whatever the number is I guarantee it will be double SSE. There may be legit things to question or wonder about regarding the extension but low ridership is not one of them. Crikey, that's why they're building the DRL in the first place! It's all John Tory and his minions say on the news, over and over again, is that we can't build the extension because all the riders will overwhelm the system. It's a reasonable bet and the numbers aren't getting lower the more people move into the region.

We have a century of unbuilt transit plans collecting dust, and there's no logical reason that a $0.7bn/km deep bore subway extension to fields at Langstaff or a Montana's at Hwy 7 can't sit on a shelf alongside them.

And yet, $55M. All you dust-gathering projects that got $55M this week, raise your hands!
No - just the one I keep saying is real that 44north keeps saying isn't really real?

Oh, and there's a Montana's, a Kelsey's AND a Milestones. They've got it all up there, OK?

 

[jaycola]

Looking north on Yonge from the north end of World on Yonge at 8:00 am today. The line of traffic runs unbroken right up to Hwy 7 and south to Finch. I wonder how many of these drivers are headed to Finch Station?

 

[narduch]

Even if they aren't heading to Finch Station, they are probably heading to a destination served by some other station (Sheppard, York Mills, Lawrence, Eglinton, etc.)

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Even if they aren't heading to Finch Station, they are probably heading to a destination served by some other station (Sheppard, York Mills, Lawrence, Eglinton, etc.)

Nah - those are REGIONAL drivers. They're very clearly all going to Union Station. What those people need is a GO Train or at least to drive not ALL the way to Finch station but a few blocks south of this picture, an then take the subway. Take it to Union. Where all of them are going.

And it's a good thing road capacity is totally different from transit capacity because we can very easily add more drivers to that road, all while increasing our economic health and sustainability, whereas adding riders to the subway underneath that road would cripple the region virtually overnight.

Actually, seriously, it's amazing there's only 2 buses in that picture. I'm sometimes stopped at a light around there and I'll have 6 or 7 within my field of vision. You need to be closer to Steeles to get that quantity.

 

[44 North]

There's no "change in plans." They did a study to figure out where to put the yard. that was its conclusion. So, to clarify - you think it should end at Steeles but may actually go north of 7. Sure, why not?

It's actually a fairly sizable change. Required a separate TPAP addendum, increased YNSE's (already high) cost/scope, and the requirement that the yard be aligned in such a way and convertible for revenue service means that we're paying for the extension to the doorstep of 16th Ave without actually paying for it (except that we are). And I guess ensuring that we'll eventually lose much of the yard in the future.

But just for the 1000th time: I expect it to change, obviously plans change blah blah blah. But then you have to admit this project has NOT changed over a DECADE. it's still a subway, it's still going to Highway 7, it's still obviously a priority for the province and the region and is on the books with the city and there is no indication it's shifting any time soon.

The proposal that is YNSE hasn't changed in over a decade? Well for one it's not under construction, nor will be any time soon - which runs contrary to the original plan that envisioned it being in operation in the mid '10s (i.e nowish). I'd say a multibillion dollar proposal not existing (when it was supposed to exist) is a pretty big change. But I guess you're correct that no shovels in the ground in 2017 vs no shovels in the ground in 2007 does not a change make.

the modeling? Fine, it needs to be updated. But whatever the number is I guarantee it will be double SSE. There may be legit things to question or wonder about regarding the extension but low ridership is not one of them. Crikey, that's why they're building the DRL in the first place! It's all John Tory and his minions say on the news, over and over again, is that we can't build the extension because all the riders will overwhelm the system. It's a reasonable bet and the numbers aren't getting lower the more people move into the region.

Guaranteed double YNSE ridership vs SSE? Just 24h ago it was a "fact" that it will be TRIPLE. I dunno dude, both your fact and guarantee sound like the dreaded fantasy talk. But I guess there are too many variables. I mean, which SSE are we referring to: the one that's been reduced to shreds, shortened, with no stations, and with two parallel commuter services offering discount fares and unbelievably high frequencies? Or the longer one with actual stations and a semi-realistic parallel alternative? And which YNSE are we referring to: the one with a flat fare, no Barrie or Stouffville RER in place, no improved parallel GO RH, no GO fare integration, and where RHC/LG defies the odds and historical evidence to become the Centre it was promised to be? Or the one we'll likely end up with?

Looking north on Yonge from the north end of World on Yonge at 8:00 am today. The line of traffic runs unbroken right up to Hwy 7 and south to Finch. I wonder how many of these drivers are headed to Finch Station?

Not unlike much of the GTHA, or the ~30 other surface transit corridors with even higher ridership. More reason why people should be miffed that a subway in operation a quarter century (or more?) after it was promised might not be the wisest decision. Or why some might ask whether the massive $700M/km pricetag is the best use of scarce/nonexistent funds, and whether some kind of alternative should've been explored. Could be a loong time before anyone is riding a subway on Yonge north of Steeles, yet the demand for rapid transit is obviously here today.

Believe it or not I'm not averse to building rail under (or along, or above) Yonge. I just don't think the preexisting plans for an extension of Line 1 is the best way to do it. Reasons: ultra-high cost, short length, the decade-long delay we're now seeing, construction time, downstream issues, etc.

 

[drum118]

Looking north on Yonge from the north end of World on Yonge at 8:00 am today. The line of traffic runs unbroken right up to Hwy 7 and south to Finch. I wonder how many of these drivers are headed to Finch Station?

If you look close, most of those cars are a single person driving and that the problem for traffic backup.

If you got 2,000 cars a hour using this section, the best you most likely will have is 2,500 being move on 2 lanes. You have a VIVA bus that most likely carrying 70 riders and I see 2 southbound, making 140 using this section at about 5% road use. You have some trucks as well, moving goods or material reducing numbers of people down being move.

I would guess 40% would be going to Finch, but that can be higher. Even if you say 70% of these cars are going to Finch, that only about 1,800 transit riders and well below the threshold for a BRT. How many cars can fit the Finch Parking lot?? York Mills Lot will be history shortly, leaving no cheap parking area next to the subway.

So this photo is to justify building a subway is the best way to go, it is over kill showing why one should not be built. If this was showing mostly buses let alone LRT in this photo, you start to make a case of building a subway here.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

It's actually a fairly sizable change. Required a separate TPAP

That's not a change. It was always needed and the rail yard had to go somewhere. It was an addition but not a real change to the project itself. When they alter the TPAP for the subway, remove a station, change the mode... That's different.

we're paying for the extension to the doorstep of 16th Ave without actually paying for it (except that we are). And I guess ensuring that we'll eventually lose much of the yard in the future.

By that logic, we've already paid for an extension to Cummer, since the tail tracks go there.

The proposal that is YNSE hasn't changed in over a decade? Well for one it's not under construction

So, one might say nothing has changed?
Change in timing is not changing the subway. A delay is not a change, despite your philosophical musings in whether something that didn't exist still not existing is a change. Neither is a rail yard.

Guaranteed double YNSE ridership vs SSE? Just 24h ago it was a "fact" that it will be TRIPLE. I dunno dude, both your fact and guarantee sound like the dreaded fantasy talk.

Models are predictions not fantasies. They evolve but until we reach that future it's ut best we have.

But I guess there are too many variables. I mean, which SSE are we referring to:

It's immaterial. Every revision has worse numbers then the last. We all know the Yonge extension will have higher ridership so let's leave it at that.

(but thanks for demonstrating that difference between a project that's changed many times and one that's been stable for a decade)

Or why some might ask whether the massive $700M/km pricetag is the best use of scarce/nonexistent funds, and whether some kind of alternative should've been explored.

Coulda woulda shoulda didn't-a.

Could be a loong time before anyone is riding a subway on Yonge north of Steeles, yet the demand for rapid transit is obviously here today.

Well, we agree on a few things.

Believe it or not I'm not averse to building rail under (or along, or above) Yonge. I just don't think the preexisting plans for an extension of Line 1 is the best way to do it.

I know, really. I just don't think it matters, is my point. The fact that I am pro subway doesn't matter either. That's also my point.

I don't think they could have built an LRT in the interim. And killing the BRT made sense at the time but is more frustrating the longer this goes. The situation has just been what it's been, unfortunately.

 

[BMO]

If you look close, most of those cars are a single person driving and that the problem for traffic backup.

If you got 2,000 cars a hour using this section, the best you most likely will have is 2,500 being move on 2 lanes. You have a VIVA bus that most likely carrying 70 riders and I see 2 southbound, making 140 using this section at about 5% road use. You have some trucks as well, moving goods or material reducing numbers of people down being move.

I would guess 40% would be going to Finch, but that can be higher. Even if you say 70% of these cars are going to Finch, that only about 1,800 transit riders and well below the threshold for a BRT. How many cars can fit the Finch Parking lot?? York Mills Lot will be history shortly, leaving no cheap parking area next to the subway.

So this photo is to justify building a subway is the best way to go, it is over kill showing why one should not be built. If this was showing mostly buses let alone LRT in this photo, you start to make a case of building a subway here.

Because obviously Road Capacity = # of riders in a catchment area or entire Region based on a single street...

what it does prove, however, is that we need alternatives for these single occupants to be shifted away from autos to alleviate this particular street.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

A single image doesn't prove or disprove anything.