WislaHD
Superstar
The sooner the DRL has shovels in the ground, the quicker we can get building on the Yonge North Extension.
Just get things moving.
Just get things moving.
This is the weakest argument that I have heard.
If the transfer LRT would work - then riders would not be deterred from using it because of the transfer. Thus, in the transfer LRT plan, all riders are funneled to the B-D where they will transfer to the Yonge subway - the exact same travel pattern as with the SSE.
If the transfer LRT is a big deterrent, than it is the wrong plan.
If the above argument is made, the only solutions are:
- The Ford-McGuinty Eglinton-Scarborough Crosstown LRT with a connection to the DRL at Science Centre, or
- Much enhanced SmartSpur,
- A brand new line from STC to downtown.
From the Sun:
Tory muscles province ... and rightly so
http://www.torontosun.com/2017/04/04/tory-muscles-province--and-rightly-so
Bang on.
Something's wrong at the Stun! They got something right, and Sue-Ann Levy yet...From the Sun:
Tory muscles province ... and rightly so
http://www.torontosun.com/2017/04/04/tory-muscles-province--and-rightly-so
Bang on.
Haha! There are few things in life that make me affirm my sense of moral certainty about something than. TORONTO SUN editorial saying the opposite.
I love someone citing them as experts on transit, so I know with whom I'm dealing. They haven't been "bang on" on transportation issues since the invention of the steam engine.
My day is well in hand and I thank you for it.
It's an editorial on politics, not transit planning. They are just pointing out the obvious
Also does someone have the project EA link? I'd like to read it again please
Except when Bombardier can't make trains stop where they are supposed to:ATC allows for a fixed & determinable location at the stop where the doors are opened. With a bit of tape on the ground the cues become very orderly.
http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/...o-San-Jose-on-track-but-new-cars-11047689.phpAmong those problems are issues related to train control and propulsion, including getting the new cars to stop within 1 foot of the black boarding marks on station platforms. Existing cars have a 3-foot margin.
Except when Bombardier can't make trains stop where they are supposed to:
http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/...o-San-Jose-on-track-but-new-cars-11047689.php
The EA needs to be updated...before we do anything north of Steeles.The TPAP report is here.
Exhibit 5-13: TTC/City Ridership Forecasts - 2031
Station Existing 2031
South at Steeles - N/A - 15-17,000
South at Finch - 10,500 - 17-19,000
South at Bloor - 30,000 - 37-42,000
The above estimates are based on the City’s GTA model with comparisons and adjustments made using the results from the TTC’s MATIDUC model. The models incorporate changes to the GTA transit network including the following network improvements to 2031:
York Region population and employment forecasts for intensification in the Yonge and Spadina corridors north of Steeles and City of Toronto forecasts south of Steeles (based on Official Plan forecasts and waterfront development);
Well, Finch LRT no longer goes to Yonge and Sheppard East is a huge question mark. That further reinforces the need to update this.Forecasts of future ridership have been prepared for 2031 assuming that the Transit CityLRT lines and both the Spadina and Yonge Subway extensions into York Region are constructed
Again... where does it says by how much of that growth is a result of the RHC-Steeles portion? Lots of focus on the ridership growth south of Bloor without answering the question of the ridership in Richmond Hill.Forecasts of future ridership have been prepared for 2031 assuming that the Transit City LRT lines and both the Spadina and Yonge Subway extensions into York Region are constructed. As shown in Exhibit 5-14, in this scenario, ridership on the Yonge Subway south of Bloor Street is expected to grow from the current level of 30,000 passengers per hour in the morning peak to 37,000 to 42,000 passengers per hour in 2031. As was noted earlier, the assumptions made with respect to service levels and relationship to ridership between the Yonge Subway and GO Rail are complex and must be subjected to detailed assessment. Such a detailed assessment has not yet been done.
So, 20% of the highest projected ridership (42k) for the AM Peak Hour / Peak Direction Volumes and I repeat SOUTH OF BLOOR in 2031, means that they are projecting that 8400 is due to the Yonge extension. How much of that 20% is between Finch to Steeles and how much of that 20% is between Steeles and RHC.In order to better understand the relative contribution of the Transit City initiative and the Yonge Subway extension project to growth in peak point ridership south of Bloor to 2031, additional model runs were undertaken excluding these individual projects to identify their contribution to the overall growth in demand on the Yonge Subway south of Bloor. These runs indicate that, of the forecast 7,000 to 12,000 growth in ridership on the Yonge Subway south of Bloor:
- Approximately 20% is related to the extension of the Yonge Subway to Richmond Hill
If the SSE will most likely cost above $5B for 1 station for 6.4km, no way this Richmond Hill Extension isn't more expensive...much more expensive!$2.4 billion (2008 dollars)
The Toronto subway is well, Toronto's. The city clearly wants those vehicles off the road north of Finch and feels the subway to Steeles is the best way to achieve that. I'd support the city building that stretch on their own with no stations in between.why not include Steeles to Finch? It's one project, not two projects (i.e. Finch to Steeles and then Steeles to further north).
The debate of BRT LRT Subway has been on-going for 300ish pages, I suggest you going back and take a look. History usually tells the story and does not need much rationale - Just look at where the Vaughan subway ends you will find your answer - no matter how unreasonable that would be.
You're too smart to play this dumb.Such narrow thinking persists. A car traveling on Yonge doesn't disappear once it hits steeles. Not if it's going north. Not if it's going south. They're the same cars and you just remove origin-destination from the equation as if steeles means anything to anyone except tax collectors.
I know you get my point...you just won't admit it.This notion is as meaningless and absurd as having different cruise ships on either side of the equator
Perhaps but as of today, your 50k new residents aren't there. It's York Region job to figure out how to move these people, not Toronto.I'll only say, regarding your questions about the corridor north of steeles, that the current secondary plans allow for something like 50k new residents. That's just along Yonge, and excluding the Growth centre. SSE, by contrast has ZERO housing units planned and it will ALWAYS have zero units planned because there is no corridor there to develop.
Then build your own subway like the New Jersey Path to Steeles. If it was this viable, York wouldn't need Toronto but York knows full well that Richmond Hill Centre to Steeles doesn't warrants the billions required to build it.Beyond that, I'm no more interested in meeting your conditions than I am thinking Sue Anne Levy hit upon some choice piece of wisdom. Everyone's entitled to opinions after all. Just not their own facts.
They were dumped on us by the province who won't help fix them. Then you have the 905 using them. If you're unhappy with the tolls, then stay home. However cities around the world who installed them haven't really saw a decrease in car traffic.'it's not Toronto's job to fix York Region's traffic.' man, that's a good one! You should have told it to Johnny Tory when he thought 905 residents should pay tolls on Toronto's highways. Musta thought they had something to do with Toronto's traffic?