News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 6.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 34K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 3.4K     0 

drum118

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
18,779
Reaction score
17,887
City:
Toronto
First of all, the number of people within 500 metres of a subway stop almost always make up a small fraction of the total ridership of a station. Feeder buses are far more important, and the excellent feeder bus network is one of the reasons Toronto's suburban transit is so successful. That's why the surrounding density of a subway line is actually quite far down the list in terms of important factors for determining where to site a new line. York Mills, for example, is one of the busier stations in the system despite the fact that it's surrounded largely by forests and single family homes. It has more than three times the ridership of Museum station, which is surrounded by a huge university campus, major tourist attractions, and office and condo towers.

All that said, I'm baffled by people who claim that this part of the region is somehow low density. Look at North York Centre? It's packed with more towers than almost any other part of the city. The planns for the area further north on Yonge are similar. The Richmond Hill Centre and Langstaff areas are planned to house tens of thousands of people at high densities.

Only RHC and part of Langstaff will see development like North York Centre. The rest will see very little.

NYC station was built after the line was built and sees 25,000 riders a day.

There is no bus feeder lines for this line north of Steeles that will generate more riders than what takes place at Finch today.

You are moving YRT riders on Yonge St that currently go Finch to RHC or another station with very few new riders being added.

Given the fact that the other stations north of Steeles are not going to see any real density for them, growth will be very very small.

As I said in the past, the line north of Steeles is not going to see the density or development like what is taking place at NYC or plan from it north to Steeles as the Region dose not or cannot change that area for various reasons. The NIMBY have opposed more density for this area. Thornhill is a historical area and very little in the way of density can take place there.

Now tell me where all these so call riders going to come from to support this extension?? I am looking at beyond 25 year window.
 

unimaginative2

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
4,554
Reaction score
9
I don't think you've been following other parts of the forum. There are all kinds of proposals for the area around Cummer, Steeles, and north of Steeles. The handful of blocks around historic Thornhill won't be seeing mega-condos, but that's completely unimportant. There are condos going everywhere.

Obviously more people will be attracted to the subway if they don't have to go all the way down to Finch on the bus. There is terrible congestion on that stretch and Finch is massively overcrowded. That subway should have been extended years ago.
 

MetroMan

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
8,108
Reaction score
4,796
Here's the latest scoop:

- Sheppard Panel will recommend LRT

- The panel is not considering recommending a subway extension to Victoria Park or Pharmacy because Sheppard will continue to be an operational liability

- However, if as part of the same project, Sheppard is interlined to become a part of the University/Spadina line, the numbers begin to make sense

If Ford will agree to parking taxes or road tolls, Stintz's motion will be to ask the Province to extend the subway line one stop East to Victoria Park and one stop West to Bathurst with the funds available. Meanwhile, the city will commit to implementing the revenue generators to extend the subway west the rest of the way to interline with the University/Spadina line. The cheapest option is cut & cover the entire remaining distance south through Earl Bales Park and then under a local road where it would meet the above ground track near the Downsview portal. These details however are out of the scope of this panel and the final alignment would be decided in the EA.

If Doug Ford doesn't put his foot in his brothers mouth, this is the motion that will be on the Council floor on March 21st. There are at least 26 councillors who will support it if Ford & Co. follow through.

This is Rob Ford's last chance to save face and tell people that he "won" and "we're building subways". However, I very much doubt that any shovels will be in the ground before the next election. The EA will take at least a couple of years and it'll be 2020 before any ribbons are cut. Ford will have to wear the parking taxes or road tolls without any subways built to show for it. This is why I think we're going to get another set of failed negotiations and we're building the Sheppard LRT instead.
 
Last edited:

Chuck

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
1,125
Reaction score
0
-I still maintain that York region is free to build Viva LRT's on Yonge to reach Steeles

What if York Region decided that instead of building LRT, they'd pony up additional cash to build a subway line instead, using their own money? Once said line was completed, suppose that they asked the TTC to continue their trains to Highway 7, since the infrastructure is now in place. If that's how the extension gets built, would you support it?

Fortunately, this isn't some fantasy. It's exactly the funding methodology that has already been agreed to. The only piece missing is funds from upper levels of government.
 

Solid Snake

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 15, 2010
Messages
866
Reaction score
1
What if York Region decided that instead of building LRT, they'd pony up additional cash to build a subway line instead, using their own money? Once said line was completed, suppose that they asked the TTC to continue their trains to Highway 7, since the infrastructure is now in place. If that's how the extension gets built, would you support it?

Fortunately, this isn't some fantasy. It's exactly the funding methodology that has already been agreed to. The only piece missing is funds from upper levels of government.

Then my question would be:

Would you be willing "York region" to pay for your share of the annual operating cost to the line? Just like Laval and Longueuil are paying to Montreal to operate the Orange and Yellow line into their cities?
 

GTS

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
413
Reaction score
1
I hope they do extend the Yonge subway line as far as Richmond Hill- but wouldn't that added to the crowding problems this line now faces. I was thinking if it was possible to renovate the station on this line (as well as the University/Spadina line so that they could accomodate 7 car train-sets instead of the present day 6? Like I said, I don't know if it is possible but it would alleviate a lot of the crowding and probably a lot of the passenges being left on the platforms as the train nears downtown.
 

BurlOak

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
6,063
Reaction score
1,645
I hope they do extend the Yonge subway line as far as Richmond Hill- but wouldn't that added to the crowding problems this line now faces. I was thinking if it was possible to renovate the station on this line (as well as the University/Spadina line so that they could accomodate 7 car train-sets instead of the present day 6? Like I said, I don't know if it is possible but it would alleviate a lot of the crowding and probably a lot of the passenges being left on the platforms as the train nears downtown.

The 6 car limit is either due to station length, or the signal spacing. I can't imagine that the signal spacing is so critical that an extra car can be added.

I had this idea:

Could most stations be left alone and only a few critical stations need to be extended (Eglinton, Yonge-Bloor, King?, Union, St. George). For most stations, either the first and last cars not stop at the platform - adequate announcement or signage is needed for this. At the key stations, all 7 cars stop at the platform. As ridership grows, stations could be extended one-at-a-time.
 

rbt

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
7,244
Reaction score
3,476
The 6 car limit is either due to station length, or the signal spacing. I can't imagine that the signal spacing is so critical that an extra car can be added.

Don't forget switching time. Longer trains require a reduction in frequencies due to the longer time it takes to get through the switches.

Switch capacity is one of the main selling points of a Yonge (and Spadina) line extensions. It's damn hard to increase frequencies between St. George and Bloor without reconfiguring end of the line operations.
 

TransitPolicyChanger

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
130
Reaction score
3
The 6 car limit is either due to station length, or the signal spacing. I can't imagine that the signal spacing is so critical that an extra car can be added.

I had this idea:

Could most stations be left alone and only a few critical stations need to be extended (Eglinton, Yonge-Bloor, King?, Union, St. George). For most stations, either the first and last cars not stop at the platform - adequate announcement or signage is needed for this. At the key stations, all 7 cars stop at the platform. As ridership grows, stations could be extended one-at-a-time.

It's been mentioned before, but having a car not stop in a station is a no go for several reasons - people will not pay attention to these signs or announcements and will end up pushing the passenger assistance alarm if at Museum they cannot get off the train, also, imagine there is an emergency and you need to get everyone off the train, all doors at that station need access to the platform.

Those are more safety issues, but my other point (maybe besides it being impractacle to extend the station boxes) is the Y-U-S will be running TRs only in the near future, these are fixed length trains and I don't see adding an extra cab in the middle of them.
 

unimaginative2

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
4,554
Reaction score
9
The TTC has already discussed adding a 7th car to trains on the YUS line. The platforms are already long enough for it to fit, but the issue is consistently lining up the cars in the right place. That will wait for the installation of Automatic Train Operation. Once that's done, the 7th car should come fairly quickly. It's not difficult at all to add an additional car to the TR trains.
 

GTS

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
413
Reaction score
1
Thanks for the info! I know that the capacity will increase with automatic train control- with or without a seventh car- I just thought a seventh car would really increase capacity right now to help out when the ATC is in place. It will mean less people left on platforms 'upstream'.
 

Solid Snake

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 15, 2010
Messages
866
Reaction score
1
The TTC has already discussed adding a 7th car to trains on the YUS line. The platforms are already long enough for it to fit, but the issue is consistently lining up the cars in the right place. That will wait for the installation of Automatic Train Operation. Once that's done, the 7th car should come fairly quickly. It's not difficult at all to add an additional car to the TR trains.

Any reasons why the TTC didn't order trains that already match our platform's length right from the beginning?
 

unimaginative2

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
4,554
Reaction score
9
Because the TTC can't operate them. They've said that a human operator can't line up the train reliably enough and that's why it will require ATO.
 

Top