YNSE following SSE by removing all stops except RHC and Steeles, then RHC gets cut and the whole point of the extension is destroyed and funding from province is gone. :)
 
Last edited:
I got an idea... Build the YNSE and the SSE at the same time. They are doing that now with the EC and the TYSSE.

To ensure that this does not cause the U to become too crowded, they should start the DRL first. After a year or so, start on the YNSE. The SSE can wait; at least till it grows from s a singular stop.
 
micheal_can said:
Did the TYSSE or EC loose stations?
Click to expand...
It will be fun to see what happens when the costs of that extension gets updated... Tunneling isn't the issue, but building stations along the way is. When the costs keeps climbing, it will be interesting to see if York keeps all it's stations in the planning phase.
 
Cobra said:
It will be fun to see what happens when the costs of that extension gets updated... Tunneling isn't the issue, but building stations along the way is. When the costs keeps climbing, it will be interesting to see if York keeps all it's stations in the planning phase.
Click to expand...
How much does the underground bus terminal at Steeles vs above ground in Centrepoint costs differ? It’s probably insignificant when compared to removing one or two stations.
 
Cobra said:
It will be fun to see what happens when the costs of that extension gets updated... Tunneling isn't the issue, but building stations along the way is. When the costs keeps climbing, it will be interesting to see if York keeps all it's stations in the planning phase.
Click to expand...
I think Royal Orchard is gone...and they will need it anyway in 10 years smh...
 
Cobra said:
It will be fun to see what happens when the costs of that extension gets updated... Tunneling isn't the issue, but building stations along the way is. When the costs keeps climbing, it will be interesting to see if York keeps all it's stations in the planning phase.
Click to expand...

denfromoakvillemilton said:
I think Royal Orchard is gone...and they will need it anyway in 10 years smh...
Click to expand...

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.

Leo_Chan said:
How much does the underground bus terminal at Steeles vs above ground in Centrepoint costs differ? It’s probably insignificant when compared to removing one or two stations.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
TJ O'Pootertoot said:
Judge for yourself readers of Urban Toronto. I've given up.



But you're correct - never said "identical." Just that almost all the points are the same and that they're "eerily similar."

Still wrong and you're still having this "only a subway" fight with yourself. I hope one day you win.

If you're saying, somewhere in there, that every project should begin with a case benefits analysis that assesses various modes for the prospective corridor, I agree. And I've never said otherwise.With YNSE they kind of skipped that step and then did the CBA after (which I know you find flawed). With SSE, every CBA (including the one leaked in the Star today) says the project is an utter waste. Council voted against a CBA when presented with the option. And when you are making those assessments, the development and itennsification potential are significant factors; YNSE kicks SSE's but on that count, if we're arguing similarities.

So the similarities remain superficial except that they're both "suburban subways" with politicized planning processes.
Click to expand...

Again, much of the rhetoric in favour of these suburban extensions is similar. Not sure your issue on that. Doesn't mean corridors are identical, or that a corridor is a subway (or whatever you're trying to piece together there).

Cobra said:
The chances of YNSE keeping all it's stations are slim to none. My 2 cents
Click to expand...

After what happened with SSE it'd make sense, but I dunno I'm inclined to believe it will be lengthened with a station added. At least on paper.
 
So long as the alignment is correct, skipping those stations for future development might be the prudent thing to do. Once there is demand, then build them as infill stations.
 
Cobra said:
Building stations based on future development potential versus building stations based on existing demands is what's wrong with GTA transit.
Click to expand...

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.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top