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

[BMO]

A single image doesn't prove or disprove anything.

It clearly proves the street is congested, or at the very least has a high utilization at this particular point in the AM Peak...and it would even be considered a summer data point...I've seen traffic studies based on less data than this image provides...to act like it doesn't at least prove something, I think is a unfair.

 

[drum118]

Because obviously Road Capacity = # of riders in a catchment area or entire Region based on a single street...

what it does prove, however, is that we need alternatives for these single occupants to be shifted away from autos to alleviate this particular street.

But does that mean building subway everywhere carrying riders on expensive white elephants than on systems that should be use in the first place?? I have a major issue looking to the south where they have built LRT lines that only service 5,000-10,000 riders a day, where an bus/BRT would be the better way regardless of having a higher operating cost.

You need to have the right technology in the right place that can be upgraded if the needs arise to do so.

Most people can't get beyond the idea that it cars moving to subway or bus to subway when it should be car-bus-BRT-LRT-Subway-?.

We only have x $ to work with and putting all of of it into subway that will service few riders compare to the full system is a poor economics 101.

If we throw $7 billion to build this extension as well the BD that will service about 70,000 riders, what does the other 700,000 riders gets when there is no money for them since it been used up on these 2 projects??

As I stated in the past, Cities are for people, not cars and we have no more room to build roads. Its a privilege to drive, but not a right and thats the problem as it backward. At the same time, it been the urban sprawl and poor land planing and use that has created the real problem. The Government is now dealing with that issue with people and cities say not the right way to to the point they want more roads and sprawl.

The whole GTA is a mess and to add another 3 million by 2030 without investing in transit ASP, is only going to get worse than today by investing in projects that will only service a drop in the bucket.

One can look at the billions being spent on GO Transit to see the net return since it was form has only been a ripple of what it should be, but until you have track capacity, hard to offer better service than it does today. GO/Metrolinx thinking today is old school thinking and can't see the future as trees are in the way as well backing over for the NIMBY folks.

Transit is at a stage or more like an elastic point, that its becoming far cheaper to drive than use transit on many fronts. One only has to look at TTC ridership the last 2 years to see this. At what point does that $4-$5 cost to ride transit force riders off the system as well what does it do to the people who live from day to day wages where transit eats up that day pay more than putting food on the table??

York Region only has themselves to blame for all the traffic mess and time they start dealing with it and stop looking for handouts from Toronto. This also applies to Peel and other areas.

 

[BMO]

But does that mean building subway everywhere carrying riders on expensive white elephants than on systems that should be use in the first place?? I have a major issue looking to the south where they have built LRT lines that only service 5,000-10,000 riders a day, where an bus/BRT would be the better way regardless of having a higher operating cost.

You need to have the right technology in the right place that can be upgraded if the needs arise to do so.

Most people can't get beyond the idea that it cars moving to subway or bus to subway when it should be car-bus-BRT-LRT-Subway-?.

We only have x $ to work with and putting all of of it into subway that will service few riders compare to the full system is a poor economics 101.

If we throw $7 billion to build this extension as well the BD that will service about 70,000 riders, what does the other 700,000 riders gets when there is no money for them since it been used up on these 2 projects??

As I stated in the past, Cities are for people, not cars and we have no more room to build roads. Its a privilege to drive, but not a right and thats the problem as it backward. At the same time, it been the urban sprawl and poor land planing and use that has created the real problem. The Government is now dealing with that issue with people and cities say not the right way to to the point they want more roads and sprawl.

The whole GTA is a mess and to add another 3 million by 2030 without investing in transit ASP, is only going to get worse than today by investing in projects that will only service a drop in the bucket.

One can look at the billions being spent on GO Transit to see the net return since it was form has only been a ripple of what it should be, but until you have track capacity, hard to offer better service than it does today. GO/Metrolinx thinking today is old school thinking and can't see the future as trees are in the way as well backing over for the NIMBY folks.

Transit is at a stage or more like an elastic point, that its becoming far cheaper to drive than use transit on many fronts. One only has to look at TTC ridership the last 2 years to see this. At what point does that $4-$5 cost to ride transit force riders off the system as well what does it do to the people who live from day to day wages where transit eats up that day pay more than putting food on the table??

York Region only has themselves to blame for all the traffic mess and time they start dealing with it and stop looking for handouts from Toronto. This also applies to Peel and other areas.

It's the hand we've been dealt, it's the whole reason the growth plan was put in place and very specific growth centres were crafted with the intent of connecting them all to one another. This extension would link RHC with ~4 growth centres alone. How many does a GO service connect people in Southern York Region to I can only think of one (PD1)?

Just out of curiosity I checked out Transportation Tomorrow Survey's data for AM Peak starts originating within the Yonge Extension Corridor and calculated the number of trips going to the CBD Vs North York or Eglinton here are the numbers I generated:

Keep in mind this data is from 2011 (the most recent available) and so take it with a grain of salt as the dynamics of transportation have certainly changed since then.

Total Trips: 9754
CBD (between Spadina and Parliament): 783 (8%)
North York Centre (Between Willowdale and Hilda/Beecroft): 473 (5%)
Eglinton/St. Clair: 141 (1%)

These are total trips not transit trips. This whole belief that everyone along YNSE is going to the CBD is a completely false statement, it's only true when you look at transit trips:

Total Transit Trips: 1374
CBD (between Spadina and Parliament): 781 (57%)
North York Centre (Between Willowdale and Hilda/Beecroft): 59 (4%)
Eglinton/St. Clair: 21 (2%)

It's a completely skewed idea of transit usage when you consider that less than 10% of the trips are going to the CBD yet >50% of the transit trips generated are going to the CBD. Simply put, it's much cheaper and easier to drive to finch and take the subway down and it's the most convenient way to get to the CBD. Why don't we see people taking transit to North York Centre? Because it would require either to drive to Finch, or take a bus and transfer to the subway. I don't personally find that to be a big issue, but a bunch of choice riders do. A GO service wouldn't serve anybody new it would simply provide an option for CBD trips. Based on the data almost 100% of trips to the CBD are already shifted onto transit from this area. The extension would just shift when these riders get on to a point further down the line instead of forcing them to drive south to Finch. The data is essentially saying that this extension won't be adding more riders going to the CBD, they're already taking GO or the Subway there anyway. In addition, GO service expansion completely ignores the potential trips in-between that could be captured for areas like NYC and Eglinton/St Clair. Trips that are good because they wouldn't be pushing the capacity further south of Bloor but provide what I like to call, high return-on-investment trips. Trips that get on the service but don't overstay their welcome. A person who gets on at the Terminal and stays until the end is taking up capacity the entire way, whereas a rider that gets on and off closer will free up capacity for more people to come on be transported and pay the agency.

So while, yes, there's a lot of validity in improving GO service to alleviate capacity concerns on the line, this line is likely not going to add more riders, it will simply shift when they get on and alleviate traffic congestion/ offer the opportunity to capture more in-between trips that wouldn't add pressures south of Bloor.

Anyway, something to think about. Not everyone in Thornhill is headed to the CBD and an extension could definitely serve people going elsewhere in the City and Region.

 

[andrewpmk]

<QUOTE>Guaranteed double YNSE ridership vs SSE? Just 24h ago it was a "fact" that it will be TRIPLE. I dunno dude, both your fact and guarantee sound like the dreaded fantasy talk. But I guess there are too many variables. I mean, which SSE are we referring to: the one that's been reduced to shreds, shortened, with no stations, and with two parallel commuter services offering discount fares and unbelievably high frequencies? Or the longer one with actual stations and a semi-realistic parallel alternative? And which YNSE are we referring to: the one with a flat fare, no Barrie or Stouffville RER in place, no improved parallel GO RH, no GO fare integration, and where RHC/LG defies the odds and historical evidence to become the Centre it was promised to be? Or the one we'll likely end up with?</QUOTE>

I think that the projections for Yonge North are exaggerated. I think that there is a need for this extension, but there is no way that the ridership will be this high. This will only happen if a huge amount of redevelopment occurs at Yonge/Highway 7 and I don't think that this will occur for several decades. Right now, there is a lot more development at Scarborough Centre. Projections need to be published assuming that there is no redevelopment around Yonge/Highway 7. I think that with current levels of development, the Yonge North extension will only be busy as far as Steeles and will be lightly used further north, and the Scarborough Subway will be busier.

The DRL to Finch/Don Mills is a much higher priority. Also I don't understand why the Scarborough Subway has such a bad reputation given that there is a decent amount of development near Scarborough Centre which vastly exceeds the amount of development at Kennedy, Kipling, Downsview, Yonge/Highway 7 or Vaughan Centre. The case for the Vaughan Centre subway extension was a lot worse than the case for the Scarborough subway. Downsview has lower ridership than Don Mills station.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

I think that the projections for Yonge North are exaggerated. I think that there is a need for this extension, but there is no way that the ridership will be this high. This will only happen if a huge amount of redevelopment occurs at Yonge/Highway 7 and I don't think that this will occur for several decades.

Well, if you're right we can build it now and not overwhelm Yonge/Bloor. So, yay!
Definitely a full build-out of Yonge/7 will take decades, just as it's taking 30 years+ to develop North York Centre. but if they announce the subway today, condo sales will be happening before the end of the year. If you think that's not true, you have no understanding of the local real estate market. They're already plowing over sites in Langstaff to get them ready and the Vanguard condos are going up next door to World on Yonge. As I've said to 44North many times, if a developer offered me an acre of land in any UGC - including Scarborough Centre - I'd take Yonge/7 every time. It's easy money.

You're actually saying kind of what I've been saying for a while: build it NOW because there won't be some MASSIVE increase in ridership. The immediate effect will be a slight bump and a huge number of buses and cars coming off the road. Those are all wins, as far as I'm concerned. The substantial increase will occur over time.

The DRL to Finch/Don Mills is a much higher priority.

I assume you mean for you.
It is demonstrably NOT a bigger priority for Toronto, TTC or Metrolinx (the latter of whom came up with the idea, BTW).
This isn't even debatable, objectively speaking.

Also I don't understand why the Scarborough Subway has such a bad reputation given that there is a decent amount of development near Scarborough Centre which vastly exceeds the amount of development at Kennedy, Kipling, Downsview, Yonge/Highway 7 or Vaughan Centre.

One stop + $2b + 7,300 riders @ peak = a bad reputation.
And that's without getting into how it used to be a free LRT that would be opening soon and now comes with a 30-year tax. I don't understand how anyone doesn't understand why it has a bad reputation...

One can look at the billions being spent on GO Transit to see the net return since it was form has only been a ripple of what it should be, but until you have track capacity, hard to offer better service than it does today. GO/Metrolinx thinking today is old school thinking and can't see the future as trees are in the way as well backing over for the NIMBY folks.

Transit is at a stage or more like an elastic point, that its becoming far cheaper to drive than use transit on many fronts. One only has to look at TTC ridership the last 2 years to see this. At what point does that $4-$5 cost to ride transit force riders off the system as well what does it do to the people who live from day to day wages where transit eats up that day pay more than putting food on the table??

York Region only has themselves to blame for all the traffic mess and time they start dealing with it and stop looking for handouts from Toronto. This also applies to Peel and other areas.

There's a lot of fallacies in here: it's not $7B, it's not "all" the money earmarked for transit etc. etc. Blaming York Region is really besides the point. During the 1980s and 1990s they did what every suburb in North America did; some parts are better than others. this is a systemic issue that goes way beyond a few bad councillors in the 905.
But, as BMO pointed out, the ENTIRE rationale behind Places to Grow (and the Greenbelt) is to put on the brakes on that, do things differently across the board and create transit-oriented development in prime locations.

While you're "blaming" York Region, they've been trying to do this better than anyone in the province, save Waterloo, arguably. But the larger issue is that it's all one single transportation network and you can't solve the fundamental problems you raise in a patchwork fashion.

BMO's post from the last page should be pinned to the top here since it's hard data that refutes so much of the fantasy-based talk that goes on around here. The picture Jaycola posted doesn't prove anything we don't already know: Yonge is jammed southbound at rush hour. I've seen studies - actual hard data - that show it's been at capacity, the Y/S intersection, for over 15 years. But I was on that stretch of Yonge again today and again had 7 buses in my field of vision at a single time. That's an optimal corridor shouldn't be any kind of debate.

 

[GenerationW]

But I guess you're correct that no shovels in the ground in 2017 vs no shovels in the ground in 2007 does not a change make.

There was no realistic possibility of shovels in the ground in 2007 since the EA didn't start until 2009.

 

[andrewpmk]

It makes far more sense to build a subway to a fairly established area like Scarborough Centre than to a big box complex with no development at all at Yonge and Highway 7. Why are people so optimistic about the Richmond Hill Centre development? Nothing has been built there yet. It is a strangely shaped site with high voltage power lines running through it and so it is hard to redevelop.

The low ridership of the Scarborough extension is because it was shortened for political reasons. Also I would take those numbers with a grain of salt. I think that the Vaughan subway extension will have much lower ridership than the Scarborough subway.

 

[GenerationW]

I think that the Vaughan subway extension will have much lower ridership than the Scarborough subway.

Vaughan? This is about Yonge.

Nice bait and switch.

 

[minilude]

by the way, after fare integration I'd expect some ridership increase on VIVA/YRT, not just VIVA BLUE, but all feeder VIVA/YRT buses. I have a family member lives and works in York Region. He goes to slightly north to Dufferin/Steeles everyday but have to pay double TTC and YRT - the most stupid thing I've ever seen.

 

[andrewpmk]

Vaughan? This is about Yonge.

Nice bait and switch.

The Vaughan extension north of York University is likely going to be really underused and may well become the least busy portion of the subway system.

The Yonge extension will be considerably busier, but I strongly suspect that the ridership projections for this line are severely inflated. Yonge and Highway 7 is a big box retail complex right now, and most passengers using this extension will be transferring to buses. Between Finch and Steeles there is a really good case for the extension because of heavy bus traffic, but the case for the extension north of Steeles is not as good. Redevelopment proposals for the area around Yonge and Highway 7 seem pretty pie in the sky to me.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

There was no realistic possibility of shovels in the ground in 2007 since the EA didn't start until 2009.

In fairness to 44North, his point is that they were moving ahead and then didn't build it. Ergo the plan "changed." The years are a bit besides the point and there are far larger gaps of logic and fact. At the time, they talked about getting shovels in the ground in 2008-09 and opening in 2017 or so, as I recall.

It makes far more sense to build a subway to a fairly established area like Scarborough Centre than to a big box complex with no development at all at Yonge and Highway 7. Why are people so optimistic about the Richmond Hill Centre development? Nothing has been built there yet. It is a strangely shaped site with high voltage power lines running through it and so it is hard to redevelop.

First, unlike Scarborough, the line will run under Yonge Street which is a pretty significant corridor with intensification marching steadily north from the 401. Unlike Scarborough, the terminal area is only part of the larger opportunity.

Secondly, it is a strange site and that's what makes it so fascinating and that's why it was planned the way it was (not that some people here think plans are of any import). But it's still at Yonge/7 and like Lex Luthor said, they're not making more land. Location, location, location. ITt's precisely because nothing has been built there yet that it's got so much potential - it's very different from, say, the VMC site which is much more of a blank slate. There's already an established GO and YRT station there, for starters. It's precisely because it's not an established centre that that there's an opportunity to say, "wow, there's already some good transit here. If we concentrate a bit more in the same spot, we can build a really unique suburban centre." That's really the whole idea underlying Places to Grow and The Big Move.

Metrus owns huge chunks on both sides and they're not exactly small potatoes. I can't say I know the site will develop as hoped/planned but I have no doubt it will be a significant development as soon as it opens. And likely dwarf Scarborough in time, which is a classic example of a poorly planned suburban centre. My problem isn't with RT to out there, it's how they've done it and how little they seem to have learned from what's failed there so far. The planning - and it's just the planning right now - by Markham and Richmond Hill is much more progressive, aggressive and forward thinking. Like I said, I'm not in real estate but I'd invest there in a second, for what that's worth.

 

[Rainforest]

I used to be in favor of extending the subway to Steeles only as the interim solution (relief for the section of Yonge Street between Finch and Steeles), with the possibility of going to RHC at a later date.

But, due to the relatively high cost of short extensions, perhaps this is not a good idea. It just costs too much to build the launch site for the sake of a 2-km extension only.

We are better off waiting a few more years if necessary, hopefully starting the DRL first, and then extending Yonge from Finch to RHC in one shot.

 

[Cobra]

I just want the math change here. York region should also pay for their share of the O&M costs of the line, indefinitely

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

I just want the math change here. York region should also pay for their share of the O&M costs of the line, indefinitely

That's fair. I'd just rather it happens via a provincial and/or regional subsidy. If there are going to be multiple systems (whether it's TTC or RER or something else) crossing municipal borders - which people like me say are effectively obsolete - there needs to be a financial mechanism to assure their operations are properly funded.

 

[Cobra]

That's fair. I'd just rather it happens via a provincial and/or regional subsidy. If there are going to be multiple systems (whether it's TTC or RER or something else) crossing municipal borders - which people like me say are effectively obsolete - there needs to be a financial mechanism to assure their operations are properly funded.

Why not York Region directly?