Mississauga Hurontario-Main Line 10 LRT | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx

scarberiankhatru said:
Vaughan may be getting one subway extension soon but it should have had a subway stop decades ago - Yonge & Steeles is Vaughan, too...
Click to expand...

Calling Yonge & Steeles, Vaughan, is quite a long shot. Technically only 1/4 of the intersection is Vaughan, with 1/4 being Markham, and 1/2 being Toronto. A Yonge & Steeles TTC stop would be a Toronto stop since Toronto taxpayers will be paying its cost, both capital and operating.
 
catcher_of_cats said:
Calling Yonge & Steeles, Vaughan, is quite a long shot. Technically only 1/4 of the intersection is Vaughan, with 1/4 being Markham, and 1/2 being Toronto. A Yonge & Steeles TTC stop would be a Toronto stop since Toronto taxpayers will be paying its cost, both capital and operating.
Click to expand...

Not really since there is agreement in place where York is picking up it's cost and it was noted at TTC June meeting.

It also depends where the station is built in the first place and that is not known at this time.
 
catcher_of_cats said:
Calling Yonge & Steeles, Vaughan, is quite a long shot. Technically only 1/4 of the intersection is Vaughan, with 1/4 being Markham, and 1/2 being Toronto. A Yonge & Steeles TTC stop would be a Toronto stop since Toronto taxpayers will be paying its cost, both capital and operating.
Click to expand...

Yonge and Steeles (which is in Vaughan) is just where the subway should have run to, not Finch, but you're conveniently forgetting the proposed extension to Richmond Hill. Add in potential stops at Clark, Centre, and Royal Orchard, and you have - no matter how semantically you slice it - at least 1.75 stops in Vaughan. "Getting" a subway station isn't about municipal feuding, it's about serving people, none of whom give a damn about which side of the street their taxes go to (which could easily change in a fully implemented Metrolinx future). Toronto taxpayers only pay for extensions that Toronto pays for itself...if the provincial or federal governments chip in, a majority of the projects would not be paid by Toronto.

Same for Mississauga...if it gets a subway it shouldn't be for the sake of Canada's sixth largest city getting a subway, it should be for the sake of riders, who may or may not need a subway line/extension.
 
drum118 said:
Not really since there is agreement in place where York is picking up it's cost and it was noted at TTC June meeting.

It also depends where the station is built in the first place and that is not known at this time.
Click to expand...

What amazing circumstances! If the subway was extended to just Yonge and Steeles and the station was located north of Steeles, rapid transit would finally be brought to "the 905" as the hopes of politicians and pundits will have been fulfilled as traffic congestion fades away. If the station is located east of Yonge we could say that "Markham has rapid transit" and the people of Unionville can cheer. Or if it's on the other side of the street "Vaughan has rapid transit", pleasing the citizens of Woodbridge. But with a station south of Yonge none of those possible benefits could be realized! What amazing power we have to decide what cities get to experience the wonder and benefits of "having rapid transit".

In fact, we could build tiny, little two-station subway lines spanning the borders of municipalities and bring rapid transit to every city in the GTAH! If we built a subway line along Dundas street from Woodchester Dr in Mississauga to Hampshire Gate in Oakville, both Mississauga and Oakville could have rapid transit for a few million dollars! Think of the money we could save!

[Apologies for the heavy sarcasm]
 
Unlike that theoretical Mississauga-Oakville stubway, a Yonge extension that ran even entirely on the Markham side of Yonge would still be extremely useful to people in the Vaughan half of Thornhill. To silly politicians/journalists/NIMBYs/whoever, Vaughan would not have a subway, but to the people actually using it, they certainly would have gotten a subway.
 
Hurontario down the road will need a subway, but not right now. It would be an expensive undertaking, considering how long the street is.
 
urbanfan89 said:
Most of a Hurontario Subway will likely be on elevated viaducts given the suburban feel of much of the street.
Click to expand...
By definition then it wouldn't be a subway. Sure some of the current subway is outside, but apart from overpasses and the odd embankment, it's all at least in a ditch though not covered.
 
nfitz said:
By definition then it wouldn't be a subway. Sure some of the current subway is outside, but apart from overpasses and the odd embankment, it's all at least in a ditch though not covered.
Click to expand...

If it uses subway technology, it would be a subway...that's what is meant and you know that.
 
urbanfan89 said:
^^ Most of a Hurontario Subway will likely be on elevated viaducts given the suburban feel of much of the street.
Click to expand...

Considering the huge amount of space available along the street, it would like be underground using cut-and-cover method. (This reasoning also makes it easy to build LRT. I don't think the LRT would have to built down the middle of the road at all. There are so many possibilities with this LRT.)

I personally don't think a Hurontario subway is so far-fetched, considering the Hurontario corridor between the Dundas and Eglinton already has a density of 160 people plus jobs per hectare, 80% of provincial target for Urban Growth Centres, despite the lack of any sort of rapid transit. Hell, even a simple rush hour express bus service was only introduced along Hurontario less than 3 years ago...

And remember also that Hurontario is only bus or streetcar route in the GTA makes a profit, except Dundas (MT also), maybe.
 
urbanfan89 said:
^^ Most of a Hurontario Subway will likely be on elevated viaducts given the suburban feel of much of the street.
Click to expand...

I was opposed to a Hurontario subway, but I think there is real merit in a heavy rail, elevated metro. Another somewhat half-assed option would be to have an at-grade LRT that sinks or raises itself on bridges or tunnels as it crosses major intersections.

On another note, why is elevated rail never considered in Toronto? The soaring concrete spans are actually quite attractive and it's not like Vancouverites complain about them being noisy or cutting off their views of the mountains.
 
South of the QEW and north of the Etobicoke Creek in Brampton will require either grade separation or mixed traffic, as its too narrow for a ROW without clear-cutting mature trees - something we should try to avoid as much as possible.

Going elevated is one option, but those same mature trees give those areas a certain charm that could be affected by an elevated ROW. Of course, that's just a matter of taste.

For most of Hurontario, the street is wide enough to support an on-street ROW within the existing roadway, so I don't think grade separation is necessary. Of course, if they won't budge on the issue of lane reductions then I would rather go elevated than to watch the roads be widened even further.

Furthermore, I prefer elevated to underground for the views - both me looking down onto the street and the cars looking up at me whizzing by.
 
I doubt the stretches north of Shoppers World or south of the QEW would ever see an elevated line, but the middle parts could, especially around the 401 where there's no household NIMBYs nearby. The ridership levels necessary to justify heavy rail along Hurontario could conceivably be attained not with development but if Peelers are funneled onto it and use it as the main N/S route...feeder routes fill Toronto's lines, after all.

doady said:
Considering the huge amount of space available along the street, it would like be underground using cut-and-cover method.
Click to expand...

Why cut'n'cover when you can just cut? Along flat stretches, stations could be underground but only 1 storey down (like Wellesley), and shallow trenches would be fine for the track in between, particularly for areas where it could run in the setbacks between the middle of Hurontario and office parks/condos.
 
nfitz said:
By definition then it wouldn't be a subway. Sure some of the current subway is outside, but apart from overpasses and the odd embankment, it's all at least in a ditch though not covered.
Click to expand...

Even if one wants to get into this semantic game, the TTC operates many segments of considerable length at grade (in Scarborough) or elevated (around Keele, for example).

Scarberiankhatru is, of course, right. When people refer to subway, they are referring to the subway technology that the TTC currently employs.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top