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

[Palma]

Well that subway to Pickering was really crazy. Again would not RER with 15min service negate this subway to York - RichmondHill?

 

[drum118]

Well that subway to Pickering was really crazy. Again would not RER with 15min service negate this subway to York - RichmondHill?

I was wet behind the ears in 2006 and even my GTA plan was off the wall some what based on what I know now.

In fact, that map has 4 subway lines going north in York Region including Yonge that has fewer stops than what plan for RHC.

Until you deal with the capacity south of Bloor, let alone Eglinton or Sheppard, an RER is the best option going to RHC. In my 2009 presentation to TTC Commissioner on this expansion, I call for the RH line being upgraded to double track and electrify at a cost of $1.2 B. It would deal with the various curves, as well some of the flooding problem by the Don.

This upgrading is still my recommendation today and run LRT north of Steeles after the Yonge extension is built to it. Can live with BRT until the ridership increase for an LRT that is already included in the design of the BRT.

Even building the DRL to the east needs to happen as well to Steeles.

I see RER running every 5-10 minutes down the road, but not as 12 car trains off peak.

 

[1overcosc]

Did you know that not only does Montreal charges both cities of Longueuil and Laval for their shares of the operating costs for the subway, but they were able to extend that to all 82 municipalities representing the CMM (Communauté Metropolitaine de Montreal) which is the equivalent of the GTA. Montreal plead their case that the metro benefits all those cities and contribute to their growth and success while servicing their citizens. Building and maintaining the subway is extremely expensive and this is a province where Quebec pays foe almost half the bill (if i"m not mistaken). The Metro is recognized as a CMM infrastructure and the CMM plans together for the whole region before submitting transit plans to Quebec. So all those municipalities helps Montreal with the Metro

Here lies the problem in the GTA especially Toronto. We can all agree that all the surrounding suburbs use the TTC and the subway/streetcars. That their proximity to Toronto is often used as a selling points for investors and to attract new residents. Problem is that Toronto is on their own here, which is an anomaly in the western world where all level of government subsidies transit, included the United States. The city picks up almost half of it's overall budget (Toronto taxes), and the rest comes from fares (Mostly Torontonians).

If that wasn't bad enough, York region (don't forget that they ALREADY have a subway...Vaughan) only paid their share for the capital expense...but 100% of the operating cost falls on Toronto. Surely you can appreciate why Torontonians are against MORE subways into York (already have one) while there are still parts of the city with no rapid transit.

What would be fair? That the GTA emulates what Montreal did with its CMM structure. EVERYBODY pays their share and everybody gets a voice, then projects are evaluated by the province, in this case Metrolinx.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. In the current stucture, Toronto is absolutely right to push back and to only worry/care about their own backyard. Montreal was far worse then Toronto which I pointed out in an earlier post about the vicious rivalry between Montreal and Laval over the subway extension to Laval (who were behaving exactly like York is today)

Level the playing field like what was done for Montreal and I'll be the first one to stop using the word "Steeles"

Actually the provincial government does contribute some to the TTC's operating costs through the gas tax funding.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Actually the provincial government does contribute some to the TTC's operating costs through the gas tax funding.

The decline of the TTC arguably began a decade before but, really, its whole tailspin can be traced back to the gutting of funding under Harris. He undid agreements in place for generations - CONSERVATIVE agreements - and the TTC has never recovered. The gas tax is a pittance in comparison and Toronto City Council has been too concerned with absurd below-inflation tax increases to subsidize the service more than I do. It's actually weird how they seem to take perverse pride in having the lowest-subsidized major transit system, as if it's an achievment. So, I have mix of empathy and annoyance when it comes to TTC funding. They need to take some responsibility for their own lack of progress.

But, to Cobra's point...I've been saying this for years and I acknowledge it hasn't actually happened yet, but it's been inching forward nonetheless: There will be a different, regional funding model in place by the time this line opens. I may be one of the most vociferous supporters of the project on this board but I've never expected that the extension would have an agreement similar to Spadina's. I've always assumed something different would be in place and it will. My "it's inevitable!" posts might have seemed precious a few years ago but now we can see the Metrolinx fare integration strategy on the table.

As 44North pointed out, we're also behind on revenue tools. With those 2 pieces, how to fairly fund operating would be a non-issue (or at least at a broad scale). If they were both in place, it would be a lot easier to change the whole game with these cross-border quibbles. the best way to get everyone on the same page, is to have everyone sharing the same pot of money.

I think fare integration - of one sort or another - is way way overdue and will fundamentally change things. I also expect that while teaching TTC it's not alone in the universe, it will fairly subsidize them when it comes to co-fares or other subsidization of border-crossings, including the subway. If it's not recognizing TTC's needs, it won't be sustainable, particularly if we're asking them to run their lines into "someone else's territory." But TTC also can't sit there, proud of their absurd fare recovery ratio, harping on how they've been doing the same thing since 1954 and it works just fine, thank you very much. A region where it costs $2.90 to go from Scarborough to Etobicoke but $7 to go from Highway 7 to Sheppard is not operating a sustainable, integrated transit network.

I understand the "I believe it when I see it" attitude, to a point. But this was always in The Big Move and it was always absurd to think it wouldn't happen by 2031 (if not 2021). The funding of operations should not be a long-term concern or an excuse to blame York Region or delay construction. There's a whole other argument to be made about regional governance and what Metrolinx's role should be but it boils down to:
a) Toronto is the biggest elephant in the room
b) Toronto still needs to to work with all the little elephants it ignores when it can

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Relevant to this thread: http://www.thestar.com/news/city_ha...yor-john-torys-transit-promises-analysis.html

Means that SmartTrack won't provide the Yonge relief modelled in the latest reports

 

[minilude]

do whatever you can to push Tory to move the 8 billion price tag of Smart Track to DRL medium or long version.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Relevant to this thread: http://www.thestar.com/news/city_ha...yor-john-torys-transit-promises-analysis.html

Means that SmartTrack won't provide the Yonge relief modelled in the latest reports

That's not surprising - but actual RER will have a broader impact.

I think I said it above but I find it ironic that during the campaign Tory talked about how SmartTrack will be so awesome it means we don't need the DRL, and a few months later he's on TV talking about how OBVIOUSLY we can't extend Yonge until we build the DRL, which is our biggest priority. I'd like to give him credit for changing his mind for listening to Keesmaat et al but....I can't quite do it.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

That's not surprising - but actual RER will have a broader impact.

I think I said it above but I find it ironic that during the campaign Tory talked about how SmartTrack will be so awesome it means we don't need the DRL, and a few months later he's on TV talking about how OBVIOUSLY we can't extend Yonge until we build the DRL, which is our biggest priority. I'd like to give him credit for changing his mind for listening to Keesmaat et al but....I can't quite do it.

I don't give him credit. Tory is smart. He knew exactly what he was doing.

 

[justindw]

No one's worried about Scarborough flooding the system with a cockroach-like infestation of suburbanites, but I guess that's because everyone agrees they deserve the subway.

Everyone is worried about it. It is one of the major arguments against extending the Bloor subway to STC. And when anyone brought it up, those in Scarborough argued exactly what you're arguing (only, instead of playing the suburbanites card, there were subtle and less than subtle accusations of racism - that extending to STC would allow too many poor or minority people in, but we were perfectly okay building a line to York/Richmond Hill etc).

And there are very large concerns, here and in council about what the Ellington Crosstown is going to do to the all ready at capacity Yonge line. Now, I get that you feel that Torontonians ought to give Richmond Hill riders first seat, and forget about the people in Toronto who wish to take the subsidized-by-Toronto-property-tax Yonge line, but you'll forgive me if I think maybe those in Toronto had first dibs on that last seat.

Now that we have used all the remaining capacity and more on Toronto residents using the crosstown and the Scarborough extension, we are out. of. space. Should we have built the DRL early? Well, yeah (but, there were people, like you, throwing around increasingly wild accusations about some weird disenfranchisement, and we used up everything and then some to accommodate them), but Toronto sort of had an option not to (I mean, Yonge works, if barely). With the Yonge extension, we don't have that choice. Out of space.

So, as you scream "Trump" and "nasty suburbanites", please explain to me why we, Toronto, should prioritize giving RH riders long rides into downtown, when I, who live in Toronto (and incidentally pay TO property taxes, which do pay for a piece of keeping the TTC running) will not be able to get onto trains full of riders from another city, as I try to complete my 8km trip into work.

Can you do that, in-between accusing everyone of xenophobia?

 

[justindw]

So how exactly do you stop non-residents from boarding the subway at Finch or Cummer or Steeles?

I have no interest in doing so, nor did I suggest it. And in fact, we're going to get more and more of them. There is a big difference between attempting to stop non-residents (which I don't want to do) and being called a Trump supporting xenophobe for wishing to allocating capital for a Toronto-centric project first, when one lives in Toronto.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

And there are very large concerns, here and in council about what the Ellington Crosstown is going to do to the all ready at capacity Yonge line. Now, I get that you feel that Torontonians ought to give Richmond Hill riders first seat, and forget about the people in Toronto who wish to take the subsidized-by-Toronto-property-tax Yonge line, but you'll forgive me if I think maybe those in Toronto had first dibs on that last seat.

Now that we have used all the remaining capacity and more on Toronto residents using the crosstown and the Scarborough extension, we are out. of. space. Should we have built the DRL early? Well, yeah (but, there were people, like you, throwing around increasingly wild accusations about some weird disenfranchisement, and we used up everything and then some to accommodate them), but Toronto sort of had an option not to (I mean, Yonge works, if barely). With the Yonge extension, we don't have that choice. Out of space.

So, as you scream "Trump" and "nasty suburbanites", please explain to me why we, Toronto, should prioritize giving RH riders long rides into downtown, when I, who live in Toronto (and incidentally pay TO property taxes, which do pay for a piece of keeping the TTC running) will not be able to get onto trains full of riders from another city, as I try to complete my 8km trip into work.

Can you do that, in-between accusing everyone of xenophobia?

I'm not accusing you or any individual of racism or xenophobia. What I am talking about is a pervasive false dichotomy. I think I've answered all your questions in other places on this board but I'll sum up:
-This is not about who gets "the last seat," it's about a system that gets all riders to/from where they are going in an optimal fashion. No one is trying to steal anyone's seat.
-Maybe there were concerns about Eglinton and Scarborough but I didn't see John Tory and Josh Colle go on TV to talk about how those projects definitely could not proceed because of those concerns
-The question you ask about "why we Toronto should blah blah is the crux of it and there are multiple answers. First, because Toronto and Richmond Hill share a common economic base and interest. People commute from RH to TO and vice versa, every day. People from RH go down to Toronto and work their jobs there and eat lunch there and go to theatre there etc etc.
-More to the point, as you (and most people) define it, "Toronto" is nothing more than where your taxes go. Someone drew a line. It's meaningless to most people in their day to day lives. I've made the point before but I'll make it again that if ,for argument's sake, the municipal border were at Highway 7 instead of Steeles - but a single concession north - this would all be framed differently.
Then you wouldn't have Colle and Tory on TV talking about how we can't serve the riders of North York.

But there is a line, allowing you to say that these people are coming from "another city." If there were an actual wall, instead of an arbitrary line, the shared economic and other interests of the 905 and 416 wouldn't exist and everyone would be the worse off for it.
I don't know what you do for a living and I don't know what Hypothetical RH Resident does for a living either but it's entirely possible that S/he lives in RH, commutes into Toronto and contributes way more to the city than you do. Maybe they're CEO of a hospital. Maybe they're a big-time lawyer who takes clients out for expense account lunches in the city's best restaurants. Maybe, for that matter, they get up early and commute to the city so they can pour your coffee at Tim Horton's, since they can't afford to live in the city but need to work there. To deny that person the right to a seat because of taxes...I don't get that.

(And, once again, that entire point will be undermined as soon as there is regional funding, which is imminent.)

I don't think you're Donald Trump (thankfully only one man is) but you ARE creating an us vs. them thing that does not exist. Those foreigners you don't want taking up seats are already doing it - because it's a free country. They drive or bus or even cycle down to Finch and pay their fare and get on the train. That's good for them and good for you, as a tax-paying Torontonian. The question is not how to exclude them, but how to foster a system that allows you to co-exist and move through transit efficiently. ordering them onto GO is not the solution and you can't change the fact that millions of people live outside Toronto and - good news - when they come in the city they don't all want to drive. We've failed to keep pace with growth, but that's not an excuse to start pretending that we're not citizens of a single region with a common interest.

 

[BMO]

An LRT would still add more than zero so i don't get why you're lecturing me on capacity, that wasn't the question. It was said the area wouldn't support a subway based on ridership, by that logic an LRT which is sure to have a net positive ridership attraction will be as much of an issue considering apparently there's no capacity. If there's no capacity there's no capacity, it doesn't mean you provide a different mode.

Edit: spelling for clarity

If something has a capacity of 5,000 units, and said thing is currently running at 5,000, adding even 1 more unit to that thing will push it over capacity.

It doesn't matter if you're adding a lot of a thing, or a small amount of things to it. If it's at capacity, any amount added will push it over capacity.

Or, in other words:

Is Yonge line over capacity? Yes.

Will this thing add more than zero people onto Yonge Line? Yes.

Conclusion: this thing exasperates Yonge over crowding.

Or in other other words:

Your credit card has a limit of $5,000. If you have $5,000 on your credit card, spending even another penny will push you over your limit.

 

[BMO]

I know people in York Region and they're ok, but some are opportunists, they're freeloaders, they want a ride on my dime and it's not going to happen. It's time we built a wall... and made York Region pay for it.

That worked out well for Germany....

 

[TheTigerMaster]

An LRT would still add more than zero so i don't get why you're lecturing me on capacity, that wasn't the question. I was said the area wouldn't support a subway based on ridership, by that logic and LRT which is sure to have a net positive ridership attraction will be as much of an issue considering apparently there's no capacity. I there's no capacity there's no capacity, it doesn't mean you provide a different mode.

Yes. And I also said that the LRT would also present capacity issues, and as such an LRT may not be appropriate either.

 

[BMO]

An LRT would absolutely add to Yonge ridership, which is exactly why even an LRT might not be appropriate at the moment.

So you're admitting it's not appropriate because it'll be too successful? So it's not because it may be built outside of Toronto. Thank you for clearing that up.

I'd like to see your math on justifying ending a subway at steeles that doesn’t add to capacity issues on Yonge, but I'm sure since it's in Toronto it will magically be a non-issue.