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

Xray_Crystal_Junkie said:
This whole scheme needs to go gentle into that good night.

Must have a Metrolinx executive (or two) that lives in Richmond Hill.
Click to expand...

That would certainly explain how, unlike a lot of people on this board, they understand the crucial need for high-order transit there.

It's kind of sad that on a transit board there's so many people who can't wrap their heads around how great it is that a suburban municipality is trying to create dense, urban, transit-oriented pockets. Kind of sad, also, that the knee-jerk reaction to transit expansion in suburbia is about graft and corruption (The Sorbara Line! A pro-Richmond Hill bias on Metrolinx!) as opposed to a progressive planning regime.

Yeah, into that good night, indeed.
 
the simple fact is that subways should be put where they will make the biggest difference since they are so expensive. A simple way of figuring out how big a difference they are making on traffic would be to look at the ridership of the proposed extensions. Given that the majority of suburban subway extensions are not projected to have sufficient ridership, they usually don't make sense. the Spadina extension (especially north of York U) and the Sheppard subway are lines that are perfect examples of what shouldn't be built. Luckily, the Yonge line meets sufficient ridership targets, and therefore should be funded. It sadly comes with a hook though, and that is that in order for it to be built the DRL has to be built first.
 
TJ O'Pootertoot said:
That would certainly explain how, unlike a lot of people on this board, they understand the crucial need for high-order transit there.

It's kind of sad that on a transit board there's so many people who can't wrap their heads around how great it is that a suburban municipality is trying to create dense, urban, transit-oriented pockets. Kind of sad, also, that the knee-jerk reaction to transit expansion in suburbia is about graft and corruption (The Sorbara Line! A pro-Richmond Hill bias on Metrolinx!) as opposed to a progressive planning regime.

Yeah, into that good night, indeed.
Click to expand...

Safe to assume you live in said suburban municipality?

There's a big difference between what would be nice to have and the realities of the transit situation in this city. The easiest thing to point out is how the Yonge line is already bursting at the seems and that extending this line further out into the 'burbs will only compound the issue. I'm certain that all you would accomplish in building this extension (at least initially) would be to make the commute of some people a bit cheaper as they would just hop on the subway and ride it all the way to downtown instead of taking GO transit. Most of the trips originating on this section of the line would get off downtown as it's got the most "destinations" and less would go just a few short stops within York region (especially when car ownership is much higher compared to downtown and there's amply parking) or anywhere north of the 401. Without zone based fare collection the residents of Toronto are just subsidizing those long trips.

And even if you think all that is bullshit, at the end of the day there are so many other pressing transit needs. The DRL, QQE LRT, extending Sheppard east to Downsview, a better connection between the Humbar Bay Shores area and downtown, etc. I'd even put solving the problem of the Gardiner - either demolishing and finding a suitable alternative or making significant upgrades - as a more pressing issue. I'm not saying it should never be built, but needs to be pushed far into the future. Perhaps when they decide to make the leap and integrate all the transit authorities in the GTA.
 
Last edited:
innsertnamehere said:
It sadly comes with a hook though, and that is that in order for it to be built the DRL has to be built first.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. Toronto is now insisting on a DRL before Yonge, or at least at the same time, but it's not impossible Yonge happens first if political decisions go a certain way. We are at the mercy of money and timing.

Xray_Crystal_Junkie said:
at the end of the day there are so many other pressing transit needs. The DRL, QQE LRT, extending Sheppard east to Downsview, a better connection between the Humbar Bay Shores area and downtown, etc. I'd even put solving the problem of the Gardiner - either demolishing and finding a suitable alternative or making significant upgrades - as a more pressing issue. I'm not saying it should never be built, but needs to be pushed far into the future. Perhaps when they decide to make the leap and integrate all the transit authorities in the GTA.
Click to expand...
I hope you meant Sheppard west to Downsview.

Yonge is clearly not going to be pushed far into the future, and Toronto bears a great deal of responsibility for that. Toronto approved an E.A. for Yonge in 2008 without any conditions, and Toronto dragged its heels on not making a DRL an official priority until 2012. Adam Giambrone didn't even include a DRL in Transit City, and let's not forget that was in an era when Toronto was given $8 billion to spend on any transit projects we wanted.

Blaming York Region for being successful in advancing its transit vision avoids the real issue -- we effed up!
 
Xray_Crystal_Junkie said:
Safe to assume you live in said suburban municipality?
Click to expand...

I've lived most of my life right near Steeles, on both sides, so I know what's needed and what will work, is the answer.

Xray_Crystal_Junkie said:
There's a big difference between what would be nice to have and the realities of the transit situation in this city. The easiest thing to point out is how the Yonge line is already bursting at the seems and that extending this line further out into the 'burbs will only compound the issue. I'm certain that all you would accomplish in building this extension (at least initially) would be to make the commute of some people a bit cheaper as they would just hop on the subway and ride it all the way to downtown instead of taking GO transit.
Click to expand...

No, that's just all you will accomplish FOR TORONTO. There's a lot more going on. If you want to one day live in a region that isn't designed around the notion of people sleeping outside Toronto and driving into Toronto every day, you need to create viable, transit-oriented centres outside the city. Those plans are in place. If you want to kill them in utero, by all means, talk about what would be "nice to have [FOR TORONTO]" and would what "[TORONTO] needs to have." (Especially while Toronto has a mayor with no transit plan and a council that changes direction three times, the notion that the rest of the GTA should wait for them strikes me as dysfunctional at best, and harmful to the economy of the larger region, at worst.)

The mere fact people (I don't know about you) are fine with the extension going to Steeles proves definitively this is about municipal parochialism and not regional transit planning.

I don't think your point is bullshit but it is narrow. The whole region has been hamstrung by decades of neglect and parochial thinking. There are a lot of pieces needed to remedy that and the Yonge extension is part of that. (So is the DRL, so is all-day, two-way GO, so is extending Sheppard etc. etc.)

The simple fact is this: If you push it far into the future, you guarantee - GUARANTEE - more urban sprawl and ensure that by the time it is built it you will have perpetuated another couple of decades of poor planning (or, more accurately, undermined a large-scale attempt to remedy the post-war planning mistakes). Perhaps that's just my opinion but I look at a map, and the new official plans in Markham Vaughan and Richmond Hill, and watch the travel patterns up around the obsolete municipal border and see the writing on the wall.
 
Last edited:
GenerationW said:
Toronto approved an E.A. for Yonge in 2008 without any conditions ...
Click to expand...
They approved starting the process in 2008. How can you have any conditions, if you haven't studied the issue yet! See http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2008.MM25.14

The approval itself came in January 2009, with many, many conditions, including prioritizing the DRL. See http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2009.EX28.1

GenerationW said:
Adam Giambrone didn't even include a DRL in Transit City
Click to expand...
That was an LRT plan. There was a separate Transit City report on buses, which wasn't included in the original Transit City as well. Giambrone was the chair when the current DRL study started ... which has been dragging it's feet for the last 2 years.
 
TJ O'Pootertoot said:
I've lived most of my life right near Steeles, on both sides, so I know what's needed and what will work, is the answer.



No, that's just all you will accomplish FOR TORONTO. There's a lot more going on. If you want to one day live in a region that isn't designed around the notion of people sleeping outside Toronto and driving into Toronto every day, you need to create viable, transit-oriented centres outside the city. Those plans are in place. If you want to kill them in utero, by all means, talk about what would be "nice to have [FOR TORONTO]" and would what "[TORONTO] needs to have." (Especially while Toronto has a mayor with no transit plan and a council that changes direction three times, the notion that the rest of the GTA should wait for them strikes me as dysfunctional at best, and harmful to the economy of the larger region, at worst.)

The mere fact people (I don't know about you) are fine with the extension going to Steeles proves definitively this is about municipal parochialism and not regional transit planning.

I don't think your point is bullshit but it is narrow. The whole region has been hamstrung by decades of neglect and parochial thinking. There are a lot of pieces needed to remedy that and the Yonge extension is part of that. (So is the DRL, so is all-day, two-way GO, so is extending Sheppard etc. etc.)

The simple fact is this: If you push it far into the future, you guarantee - GUARANTEE - more urban sprawl and ensure that by the time it is built it you will have perpetuated another couple of decades of poor planning (or, more accurately, undermined a large-scale attempt to remedy the post-war planning mistakes). Perhaps that's just my opinion but I look at a map, and the new official plans in Markham Vaughan and Richmond Hill, and watch the travel patterns up around the obsolete municipal border and see the writing on the wall.
Click to expand...

So what will the Yonge Line do that the Richmond Hill GO Line won't?
 
GenerationW said:
Not necessarily. Toronto is now insisting on a DRL before Yonge, or at least at the same time, but it's not impossible Yonge happens first if political decisions go a certain way. We are at the mercy of money and timing.

I hope you meant Sheppard west to Downsview.

Yonge is clearly not going to be pushed far into the future, and Toronto bears a great deal of responsibility for that. Toronto approved an E.A. for Yonge in 2008 without any conditions, and Toronto dragged its heels on not making a DRL an official priority until 2012. Adam Giambrone didn't even include a DRL in Transit City, and let's not forget that was in an era when Toronto was given $8 billion to spend on any transit projects we wanted.

Blaming York Region for being successful in advancing its transit vision avoids the real issue -- we effed up!
Click to expand...

nfitz said:
They approved starting the process in 2008. How can you have any conditions, if you haven't studied the issue yet! See http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2008.MM25.14

The approval itself came in January 2009, with many, many conditions, including prioritizing the DRL. See http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2009.EX28.1

That was an LRT plan. There was a separate Transit City report on buses, which wasn't included in the original Transit City as well. Giambrone was the chair when the current DRL study started ... which has been dragging it's feet for the last 2 years.
Click to expand...

Here's the reality. There is no shovels in the ground for the RH extension. And there won't be until the DRL is approved. There will be no political BS on this. Yes Toronto did screw up, but that was then, this is now. And now we need to take care of other areas in the city!
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
So what will the Yonge Line do that the Richmond Hill GO Line won't?
Click to expand...

Allow a person easy travel from Richmond Hill to their job at St. Clair & Yonge?

The large majority of TTC riders have destinations outside of downtown despite downtown being the most popular destination area. It's pretty safe to say that 2/3rds of riders getting on north of Finch will be going to destinations other than the financial district.
 
rbt said:
Allow a person easy travel from Richmond Hill to their job at St. Clair & Yonge?
Click to expand...
Heck, allow easy travel to Dundas and Yonge. Travel time from Langstaff (future Richmond Hill subway station) to Union is 42 minutes in rush hour. Finch to Union is 28 minutes (or it was before they got those slower TR trains on - presumably they'll get that fixed). Additional travel time to Richmond Hill station is expected to be about 12 minutes, meaning the subway will be a bit faster than the GO Train. So even if your working at King/Yonge, the subway will be significantly faster.

If anything, I'd expect the subway extension to drain people off the Richmond Hill line.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
So what will the Yonge Line do that the Richmond Hill GO Line won't?
Click to expand...

Since the Richmond Hill GO line only travels down to Union Station....I guess the answer is "Travel everywhere in the GTA that isn't Union Station."

This is the same conceptual problem: The idea that the entire region should be built around people getting to/from the financial district. More destinations=less congestion at a single point.

If I live in Richmond Hill and want to to Eglinton, I wouldn't take the GO train.
If I live in Markham and want to get to Sheppard, I wouldn't take the GO train.
If I live in Thornhill and want to get to Bloor or St. Clair or Wellesley or, indeed, anywhere other than Union Station, I wouldn't take the GO train.

(Oh, and this all works backwards as well, assuming we want to create more jobs in the "suburbs." So, the GO line is useless to go from Yonge/Eg to my shiny office job in Markham etc. etc. Or, hey, the new casino! ;) )
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top