Richmond Hill Yonge Line 1 North Subway Extension | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

The EA is complete. The 'fair bit of planning' you are referring to is the detailed design and engineering, which falls outside of the EA process.

For everythign else, read the EA report on vivanext.com
 
Second_in_pie said:
Is the EA even finished? I'm pretty sure there's still a fair bit of planning that needs to be done before they can start construction.

Also, are they going to be doing the really huge stations with this extension? I think that especially in the sections through Thornhill, they should be as minimal as possible.
Click to expand...


The EA was approved in April, I think. They only have rough principles for the stations but the Thornhill ones will be relatively small. As many here will tell you, Steeles will be huge (28 bus bays, underground) and the last two stations will be pretty big as well.

As for why it would take 3 years to get shovels in the ground...look at Spadina. It won't see real construction until next year. There's all the nitty gritty engineering work, station designs (Spadina's come out later this year), then there's relocating utilities and whatever else is under the street, and I would expect a pretty interesting set of expropriations for Yonge as well.
 
unimaginative2 said:
York can't stop pushing. Toronto will do everything it can to kill this project.
Click to expand...

Why do you think this? Requiring modifications to their existing system in order to handle the changes that will happen if this extension happens does not make the TTC obstructionist.
 
Voltz said:
Why do you think this? Requiring modifications to their existing system in order to handle the changes that will happen if this extension happens does not make the TTC obstructionist.
Click to expand...

It's a matter of perspective.
If I say "you can go to the movie after you clean your room," that's fair.
If say, "sure you can go to the movie as long as you clean your room, mow the lawn, paint the house, cook dinner, cook lunch for tomorrow and walk the dog"....well, then one could argue I'm being obstructionist and not ACTUALLY saying you can go to the movie,right?

Which is the TTC doing? That's subject to argument.
 
Voltz said:
Why do you think this? Requiring modifications to their existing system in order to handle the changes that will happen if this extension happens does not make the TTC obstructionist.
Click to expand...

The TTC is making no effort to handle the changes that will happen.

Irrespective of whether or not the extension is built to shift commuters from cars to public transit, the demand from the north end is overcapacity -- and I am told that the demand from the south-of-Eglinton end is overcapacity, too.

The TTC's response to this situation has been Transit City, on one side, and railing against subway expansion in the north, on the other. These will do nothing to handle the changes that will happen, and may in fact make exacerbate the problem. The TTC has done little to genuinely pursue the DRL, which will offload the south end, and nothing to pursue a project like LRT-izing RH GO, which will offload the north end. Why not?
 
Given the number of transit EAs/designs, etc., that the City and TTC are working on now (11 by my count, not including the Spadina subway construction start-up), I can see why the city isn't jumping into another big process on the DRL. Presumably once Spadina, Eglinton, Sheppard, and Finch start construction, and the other EAs are all complete, and moving through the design process, they will turn to the DRL monster (though you'd think that it's going to play into the Don Mills EA).
 
Fair enough - but the whole reason they have 11 projects on the go and none of them is the DRL is because they felt (based on what, I'm not sure) that those projects were more important.

I think one can debate whether the DRL or Yonge extension is more important (or even that they are equally crucial) but it seems pretty obvious to anyone with a regional perspective the DRL is more important than, say, the Don Mills LRT or most Transit City projects.

The city put itself in this position by refusing to prioritize the DRL and then wielding it like an axe to cut down the Yonge extension which unquestionably serves a need but one which they don't care about.

Heck, if the province had approved the DRL I bet Miller & Giambrone said "we won't build it unless you also extend the Yonge subway to Hwy. 7 to justify the added capacity."

So, um, I guess my answer is that I think they're being obstructionist and, in the long run, cutting their nose despite their face. Their strategy MIGHT help Toronto but it definitely won't help the GTA.
 
Last edited:
TJ O'Pootertoot said:
Heck, if the province had approved the DRL I bet Miller & Giambrone said "we won't build it unless you also extend the Yonge subway to Hwy. 7 to justify the added capacity."
Click to expand...

Oh dear god, the day that either of those individuals spoke about areas north of Steeles with anything more than a grunt is the day pigs fly.

The last thing they want is for the TTC to keep extending further into the 905 because they want to delay the implementation of an integrated fare structure for as long as they can, as they don't want to have to make a deal with York Region for cross-border ridership.
 
xtremesniper said:
Oh dear god, the day that either of those individuals spoke about areas north of Steeles with anything more than a grunt is the day pigs fly.

The last thing they want is for the TTC to keep extending further into the 905 because they want to delay the implementation of an integrated fare structure for as long as they can, as they don't want to have to make a deal with York Region for cross-border ridership.
Click to expand...

I really doubt this is the case, a lot of people on this forum love to claim it though ...

Most of the 416 VS 905 drama is self contained to this forum and this forum only along with this so called "grunt" you speak of ... The TTC already has the Spadina line to contend with in terms of the fair integration. It's very likely that no matter how it works out, the TTC will profit from it ... particularly, the Yonge extension.
 
taal said:
I really doubt this is the case, a lot of people on this forum love to claim it though ...

Most of the 416 VS 905 drama is self contained to this forum and this forum only along with this so called "grunt" you speak of ... The TTC already has the Spadina line to contend with in terms of the fair integration. It's very likely that no matter how it works out, the TTC will profit from it ... particularly, the Yonge extension.
Click to expand...

To each his own, I guess. I do still believe that what I said is the case. It may not be as prevalent as some may make it seem here, but it's definitely out there. I have even personally asked citizens of Toronto myself if they even know or care about what exists north of Steeles Ave, and you would be surprised to hear just how many of them said no. Out of sight, out of mind. Most Torontonians (especially those who are not well versed in transportation planning, or even want to see transit expand) always go back to the argument of "we pay the taxes for the TTC, so we don't want 905 riders to use our system".

And as for the Spadina extension, the fare "integration" that is happening there is bogus, and I hope to anything holy that it's only temporary. Paying a TTC fare even if you are only going to travel from VCC to 407 Transitway station on top of the YRT fare that you have already paid is not what I'd call fare integration by any means. They've just extended the pathetic Steeles barrier up into York Region by means of subway.
 
It's funny that when the Yonge extension is discussed, no one ever says "oh, that's way too long for a subway" but when the Bloor extension is discussed "oh that's way too far for the subway to go. No one will take the subway for 40 minutes" (which is a completely stupid point of view, seeing as people already sit on buses for half an hour just to get on the subway and then sit on the subway another half hour to get downtown. I should know, I've done it before, and I've seen many people do it).

That said I think the Yonge extension is important, but having the DRL is more important. I wouldn't object to Yonge STARTING because it's further along, but DRL should be moving along as well, even if it opens a year or two after the Yonge extension. Point is, they are both very important.
 
Coruscanti Cognoscente said:
It's funny that when the Yonge extension is discussed, no one ever says "oh, that's way too long for a subway" but when the Bloor extension is discussed "oh that's way too far for the subway to go. No one will take the subway for 40 minutes" (which is a completely stupid point of view, seeing as people already sit on buses for half an hour just to get on the subway and then sit on the subway another half hour to get downtown. I should know, I've done it before, and I've seen many people do it).

That said I think the Yonge extension is important, but having the DRL is more important. I wouldn't object to Yonge STARTING because it's further along, but DRL should be moving along as well, even if it opens a year or two after the Yonge extension. Point is, they are both very important.
Click to expand...

Well, I don't know... I personally have never taken the trip, but isn't the trip from Kipling to Yonge already a good 40 minutes? That would mean adding any extension to that part of the line would amount to an insanely long subway ride, in which case I would agree that not many people would want to put up with being in the tunnels for more than an hour.

At least from Finch to Union it only takes about 30 minutes, so going up to RHC would make that about 40-45 minutes. Still not bad.
 
People don't necessarily start at Yonge. I headed east to Kipling in AM rush-hour recently ... and noticed a lot getting on at Dundas West, and Jane.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top