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

Here are the uncovered maps:

Backgrounder: The Governments of Canada and Ontario make the largest investment in public transit in Canadian history - Canada.ca

All three orders of government are moving rapidly to support the recovery from COVID-19. Building on historic investments in public transit, today the Government of Canada announced $10.4 billion in federal funding for four public transit projects in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA).
www.canada.ca www.canada.ca

Northern Light said:
Observations about maps.......

Have a look at where the 'Supporting the...." goes on each of these.............right across the route maps..........



Strategically placed where Cummer should be?



Strategically placed over the section with the most serious dispute about route and underground/overground?



Hmmmmm
Click to expand...
 
Federal funding of up to $2.24 billion for the Yonge North Subway Extension is subject to submission of updated project information for formal review and Treasury Board approval.
Click to expand...
I read this as "the amount that the project will cost isn't set in stone yet, so we're going to confirm the actual amount we'll give you in due course"
 
From what I have seen, nothing really new. The only thing that caught my eye is that the Storage Facility will have capacity for 15 trains, which... neat.
 
ARG1 said:
From what I have seen, nothing really new. The only thing that caught my eye is that the Storage Facility will have capacity for 15 trains, which... neat.
Click to expand...
Did they have any substantial updates? I couldn't stay for the whole thing.
 
Undead said:
Town Hall happening at 6:30 today

Yonge North Subway Extension Open House - May 19 2021

A virtual open house to provide project updates
www.metrolinxengage.com
Click to expand...

One of the questions asked was if Metrolinx will review the two alternative route suggestions to option 3 (the one they are going with) suggested by Transport Action Ontario. It said they will study it and get back to the group, but cautioned it's very similar to what they've already looked at.

https://ontario.transportaction.ca/yonge-north-subway-extension-tao-suggests-alternate-route/

YNSE-AltOption-2.png


YNSE-AltOption-1.jpg
 
Responding to this from the Metrolinx: Other Items thread
StealthyArrow said:

Markham's Opinion on the The Alignment of the Yonge North Subway Extension​


This could very well be in the Yonge North Subway Extension Thread, but I will leave it here for now. I found it interesting that Markham does not want Option 3 for the line alignment, and wants either option 1 or 2:
Click to expand...
Honestly part of me gets why they're angry at Option 3, but speaking personally, I genuinely think Option 3 is the best option. We honestly need more above ground allignments to be pushed in the city and Option 3 is a harmless one (with the condition that there is an easy way to integrate the 407 Transitway into it while keeping it a fully grade separated corridor). I absolutely do agree though that only building 1 out of the 3 community stations is ridiculous and if we are going to bury most of the EWLRT, another project shouldn't have to take massive hits. I wonder if guaranteeing a station at Royal Orchard would be a decent compromise to let the locals accept Option 3.
 
ARG1 said:
Responding to this from the Metrolinx: Other Items thread

Honestly part of me gets why they're angry at Option 3, but speaking personally, I genuinely think Option 3 is the best option. We honestly need more above ground allignments to be pushed in the city and Option 3 is a harmless one (with the condition that there is an easy way to integrate the 407 Transitway into it while keeping it a fully grade separated corridor). I absolutely do agree though that only building 1 out of the 3 community stations is ridiculous and if we are going to bury most of the EWLRT, another project shouldn't have to take massive hits. I wonder if guaranteeing a station at Royal Orchard would be a decent compromise to let the locals accept Option 3.
Click to expand...

And that 'guaranteed' Royal Orchard station would be one of the deepest stations in the system. Spending money to save money doesn't sound like much of a compromise.
 
44 North said:
And that 'guaranteed' Royal Orchard station would be one of the deepest stations in the system. Spending money to save money doesn't sound like much of a compromise.
Click to expand...
The station should probably be built regardless. Having such wide station spacing in a corridor that is supposed to replace Viva Blue is kind of ridiculous.
 
ARG1 said:
The station should probably be built regardless. Having such wide station spacing in a corridor that is supposed to replace Viva Blue is kind of ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Alright. But back to your post. If we're saving money by going on the surface (which involves a further new station and extension over the previous plan), the compromise would be that we would build a Royal Orchard station to assuage nimbys upset about going on the surface? A bit contradictory. How much would that cost, or how much relative to the savings of the surface option. A station 150m long by maybe 50m deep isn't a drop in the bucket.

Sure ynse spacing could be closer, and dropping Drewy is ridiculous. But for Royal Orchard they're tunneling under a river valley at the lead-up to the station, which is bizzare since it's cottages and open space above. Unless York Region is advocating for a bridge, by default this "compromise" new station would cost well above average and severely eat into any savings of the surface option.
 
44 North said:
Alright. But back to your post. If we're saving money by going on the surface (which involves a further new station and extension over the previous plan), the compromise would be that we would build a Royal Orchard station to assuage nimbys upset about going on the surface? A bit contradictory. How much would that cost, or how much relative to the savings of the surface option. A station 150m long by maybe 50m deep isn't a drop in the bucket.

Sure ynse spacing could be closer, and dropping Drewy is ridiculous. But for Royal Orchard they're tunneling under a river valley at the lead-up to the station, which is bizzare since it's cottages and open space above. Unless York Region is advocating for a bridge, by default this "compromise" new station would cost well above average and severely eat into any savings of the surface option.
Click to expand...
When did I bring up cost? I 'm well aware that adding Royal Orchard would boost the cost. The reason I support Option 3 isn't really about the cost but because I really like the design of Bridge Center, assuming they can integrate the 407 Transitway into it while keeping it fully grade separated (if they can't then this is a dealbreaker as far as I'm concerned, and they should go for Option 1 or 2). As for the depth, can I get a quote for 50m? Its going to be deep, but not that deep I don't think? Ultimately we're dealing only with what Metrolinx is telling us so whether or not building Royal Orchard while digging under the river will be more expensive is... hard to say and nobody except Metrolinx knows for sure. If it is cheaper to rebuild the bridge, then they should rebuild the bridge, and if they're pressured to build a Royal Orchard than it would be a good opportunity to change the plans.

As a side note, dropping Cummer isn't ridiculous. The street is 500m away from the northern entrance of Finch Station, which is well within walking distance. Furthermore if busses like the steeles bus are dropped, that means there will be room for the Cummer Bus to stop at Finch (assuming it doesn't already). Cummer is definitely not the most necessary station (although it definitely would be nice to have, and barring NIMBY nonsense would be more important than Royal Orchard).
 
ARG1 said:
When did I bring up cost? I 'm well aware that adding Royal Orchard would boost the cost. The reason I support Option 3 isn't really about the cost but because I really like the design of Bridge Center, assuming they can integrate the 407 Transitway into it while keeping it fully grade separated (if they can't then this is a dealbreaker as far as I'm concerned, and they should go for Option 1 or 2). As for the depth, can I get a quote for 50m? Its going to be deep, but not that deep I don't think? Ultimately we're dealing only with what Metrolinx is telling us so whether or not building Royal Orchard while digging under the river will be more expensive is... hard to say and nobody except Metrolinx knows for sure. If it is cheaper to rebuild the bridge, then they should rebuild the bridge, and if they're pressured to build a Royal Orchard than it would be a good opportunity to change the plans.

As a side note, dropping Cummer isn't ridiculous. The street is 500m away from the northern entrance of Finch Station, which is well within walking distance. Furthermore if busses like the steeles bus are dropped, that means there will be room for the Cummer Bus to stop at Finch (assuming it doesn't already). Cummer is definitely not the most necessary station (although it definitely would be nice to have, and barring NIMBY nonsense would be more important than Royal Orchard).
Click to expand...

You mentioned "compromise" to deal with nimbys. As they say money talks. Money = costs. Dropping Drewy/cummer isnt that great since there's riders, ppl, development. Sure if the goal is to save money then chop chop. As you say it's only "500m away". But hold up, Metrolinx is pushing station spacing for Bridge and Hi Tech equal to or less than 500m. So...?
 
44 North said:
You mentioned "compromise" to deal with nimbys. As they say money talks. Money = costs. Dropping Drewy/cummer isnt that great since there's riders, ppl, development. Sure if the goal is to save money then chop chop. As you say it's only "500m away". But hold up, Metrolinx is pushing station spacing for Bridge and Hi Tech equal to or less than 500m. So...?
Click to expand...
High Tech is being pushed by Richmond Hill and will be built because its ultra cheap, and because the tracks will be there regardless due to the MSF. High Tech basically adds nothing to the overall cost and at worst is a low hanging fruit station. Its completely harmless, don't bring that into this conversation.

Right now the plan is to only build 1 community station, and as far as I'm concerned it should be built at Clark, not at Royal Orchard or Cummer. I said Royal Orchard being built to appease the NIMBYs as a pure hypothetical. In reality I doubt it would do much, nor should we try to quell there NIMBYism, and if we do build Royal Orchard, we might as well at this point try to find the money to build all the money because there is absolutely no reason to fully bury Eglinton West while cutting stations on Yonge North. The Federal Government is paying 40% of the project cost, and according to Doug he could've built all 4 subway projects without the Feds. He should be ready to pony up the extra cash, let's not repeat the same mistake as we did with the extension to Finch back in the 70s.
 
I don’t get this line of reasoning at all to build Royal Orchard at all. It’s expensive to build and doesn’t have a strong ridership case. The stated points in favor are “we should do it as a compromise to convince the locals” and “it’s wide stop spacing” and “we should build it anyways”.

The last point seems especially unconvincing. If that’s the case we should spend the money to build the OL to the expected capacity ASAP by buying all the rolling stock we need now, etc. Instead this line of reasoning seems solely applied to the YNSE.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top