I keep seeing two arguments:
- Have GO Transit deal with it and improve service to Richmond Hill, this line will cross borders so it's technically a regional problem!
- It'll push the Yonge Line over capacity
So we're essentially arguing that this line makes so much sense that too many people will use it while suggesting we forego a line that makes a lot of sense in terms of ridership by replacing it with another service that doesn't serve the same areas, has a lower capacity and is planned to have lower frequencies?
#TorontoTransitPlanning
It's a complicated issue, no doubt. And it doesn't help matters much that the public is given misleading/contradictory info, and offered new unstudied ideas while others get dropped. Not to mention being completely left in the dark on many issues. But here's my take on GO for the RH corridor:
It does have a heckuva lot of potential, and does reduce ridership of the Yonge North extension. This isn't opinion - it's what Metrolinx's very own numbers told us several years ago. The Big Move promised RH Express Rail (project #47) - a line important to the region's growth, future transportation, UGCs, and P2G. In 2008 Metrolinx provided modeling data of all the Big Move projects (
which AFAIK is the most comprehensive and unbiased data on GTA transit projects/ridership we've ever seen, and will ever see). Long and short, it said that RH Express would carry 31.9M annual riders in 2031 with a peak point ridership of 18.1k. These are large #s. *The line also had an excellent business case provided in a separate 2010 report.
For the Yonge North extension it wasn't as rosy, and the ridership #s come nowhere near the ultra-high projections we're seeing now. Metrolinx's modeling projected the extension would have 8.8k peak point and 19.5M annual riders (approx 65k avg wkday). These are low #s, particularly when compared with its astronomical per km cost. It'd carry less than subways like TYSSE (21.4M/yr), Sheppard Stub (20.8M/yr), and the DRL U (117.1M/yr). Not to mention less than LRT projects like Crosstown (62.7M/yr), Don Mills (39.4M/yr), Scarb RT (31.2M/yr), Waterfront W (29.2M/yr), and Finch W (23.2M/yr). On top of this the low peak #s easily make it a candidate for LRT. If using the mode capacity charts provided by Mlinx and TTC (see: Sheppard and SSE debates) it most likely would be excluded from even being
considered worthy of a subway. Perhaps semi-underground Crosstown-style LRT, or fully grade-separated SRT-style LRT. But not 6-car underground subway.
So in 2008 this data showed that 2031 GO RH Express Rail wold carry over 10M more than riders/yr than Yonge North (31.9M vs 19.5M), and have more than 2x its peak point ridership (18.1k vs 8.8k). Unsurprisingly however this 2008 modeling data differed significantly from the 2013 Yonge North Benefits Case report. This report didn't follow the same holistic approach (owing largely to the fact that it
dishonestly omitted showing the data comparing both a subway and GO Express to RHC - which were both priorities at the time). The report showed a GO to RHC option, and a subway to RHC option...but what was missing was the data showing the two projects together (and the subsequent ridership diversion this would have). Since the 2008 modeling showed us this data but the subway report didn't, it's reasonable to conclude this omission was deliberate. For anyone wanting to travel from RHC/LG to downtown TO (i.e a significant %), how many would take a +45min crowded subway ride vs a 29min GO train (which was an "express" option presented in the RH BCA)? And with recent talks about dist-based subway fares, how many more would move to GO?
Fast forward to Spring 2015, and the RH Express Rail was officially dropped by the Prov (with Stouffville and Barrie getting upgraded to RER). Was this political, or logical, or both...it's hard to tell. Stouffville had somewhat low ridership projections and had previously performed poorly when studied for electrified express rail, yet was upgraded. And GO has known about flooding issues in the Lower Don for decades. Although a problem that requires remedying (with or w/out Express Rail) - it's in no way a dealbreaker. Either way, it was dropped. And changing plans to win votes isn't anything new, so perhaps the same happened here.
So while some on this site will argue that RH improvement are a non-starter with little benefit, the preceding reports paint a different picture. For one it has enormous regional importance w/ high projected ridership. Two: it has a solid business case and was an important part of the Big Move/P2G. Three: Metrolinx has shown us very recently in their YRNS and New Station analysis that RER / subway / LRT can all travel in this flood-prone corridor (with some of these shortlisted ideas to be presented later this year). So if we're to trust the experts (Metrolinx), then the experts in this case say improvements to the RH corridor
are possible.
TL;DR - It is a complicated issue, and the DRL and its own complexity only adds to this. But at the end of the day people are right to promote GO improvements between Union and RHC, and to question extending Line 1 north of Steeles. The previous reports/data support their argument. Not to mention the historical evidence of ultra-high development, ridership, and transit mode shares projected for previous Centres (like that proposed at RHC/LG) have almost always been way off. This doesn't mean ppl don't support LRT, RER, etc in York Region. It's just that they don't support the subway.
And regardless of whatever is built or not, the DRL was needed 50yrs ago. So thankfully TO's Planning Dept/TTC are doing a good job in finally planning/prioritizing it. I personally don't think one cent should be spent on Yonge capacity improvements if that money could otherwise go to a DRL.