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

[doady]

Laval and Longueuil are actually not that far from downtown Montreal so i don't see why people in these places would use the commuter rail system.

And like Toronto, Montreal needs a third north-south subway line to provide relief to the main subway line from the east side. Probably Pie IX would be the best corridor. You'd think they would have built this line first, but the problem is, such a line would serve Montreal-Nord, a predominately black neighbourhood, and so there would little political support for it.

 

[unimaginative2]

Ansem, what you have to understand is that when the DRL was proposed in the 1980s, the downtown councillors led by Jack Layton aggressively fought the DRL out of fear that it would bring more development--especially office development.

 

[scarberiankhatru]

And like Toronto, Montreal needs a third north-south subway line to provide relief to the main subway line from the east side. Probably Pie IX would be the best corridor. You'd think they would have built this line first, but the problem is, such a line would serve Montreal-Nord, a predominately black neighbourhood, and so there would little political support for it.

Hmm...kind of like a reverse Transfer City, which has lines planned around priority neighbourhoods.

Perhaps, to complement the Yonge extension, we should try to curry support for the DRL based on the corridor of minority groups and social need that exists along Don Mills.

 

[MisterF]

Ideally, transit and urban development would go hand in hand. Should we address areas that have the existing densities to support LRT or subways, first? Absolutely.

In your last post you said subways should always be built to nowhere. So which is it? These two viewpoints are mutually exclusive.

But does that mean, we should turn down opportunities to build dense neighbourhoods from scratch when the chance arises? I think not. Here we have a unique opportunity to ensure that new development meets density standards necessary to support a subway. By your rationale, we should not support it. Instead we should send regional rail out there, wait 30 years, then build a subway, and then re-develop the area to the density we will get with building the subway in the first place.

Two points. First, I never said I don't support the Yonge subway extension. What I don't support is constant suburban subway extensions at the expense of subway expansion in the central area. An adequate subway system was never built downtown and that needs to be addressed.

Second, a lot of people seem to have this idea that subways are necessary to build dense neighbourhoods in the suburbs, and that buildings subways will ensure that dense neighbourhoods will develop. Neither is the case. Even in Toronto there are numerous examples of sprawling communities with subway access, and dense, transit-supportive communities with no subway access. Heavy rail subways are completely unnecessary to develop dense walkable communities in the suburbs.

You infer that regional rail isn't enough to serve the needs of a dense suburban neighbourhood, and that a subway will have to be built eventually. This isn't the case. Metrolinx's own reports state that regional rail (or express rail, as it calls it) can have similar capacity to subways. Look at a city like New York, where the subways don't go far into the suburbs. There are vast areas outside the city that are more dense and urban than any GTA suburb, and they're not served by subways at all. Insted, they rely on regional rail networks. Stations are located in tightly knit urban communities instead of GO Transit-style parking lots. Australian cities get by without real subways at all - their entire urban rail systems are regional rail.

Regional rail is much more capable that people here seem to think. I think people are stuck on the idea that regional rail = GO trains.

Keith is being the voice of sanity here. York Region and the province have mandated that dense development is the new norm in the burbs and making those communities "transit-oriented" is the key to making them work and keeping cars off roads in the burbs and downtown. A dense development that doesn't have rapid transit from day one will fail. The desire to get "ahead of the curve" is a crucial concept of modern transit planning since failing to do so has created the car culture which is now collapsing.

Getting ahead of the curve and building rapid transit doesn't necessitate subways. See my points above. And your assertion that dense development without rapid transit will fail is not obviously true. Large areas south of Bloor have no rapid transit but they're thriving and very dense. MCC doesn't have rapid transit and it's not failing at all. People's criticisms of it are mostly design-related (more on that in my next paragraph).

People bitch about how everyone in the burbs drives and people shop in big box stores. Well, that's because they never had a subway (or rapid transit). It's not a chicken/egg argument anymore.

It's much more complicated than that. Rapid transit alone does nothing to make, say, downtown Vaughan an urban community. It might create more demand for development, but at best that would result in another MCC unless a long list of other issues is addressed. Rapid transit is just one piece of the puzzle, and rapid transit doesn't have to be subway.

People in the suburbs drive everywhere and shop in big box stores because the entire area is designed for cars - subdivison layouts, street design, land use, architecture, and density all contribute to that. A suburb can be designed from scatch to be urban and dense without subways. A proper regional rail network can accomplish just as much, for less money.

MisterF - if you think that Highway 7 is "nowhereseville" or an "outer suburb" you need to leave downtown more often. As myself and others have said, there is virtually nothing that changes as you cross Steeles aside from the government - especially on Yonge.
Newmarket may be an outer suburb but Thornhill hasn't met that definition since Mel Lastman was elected mayor. Of North York.

My post was a response to Keithz's general statement that subways should always be built to nowhere. I didn't say that Highway 7 is nowheresville. I didn't say that I'm opposed to the Yonge extension specifically. I didn't say that anything changes once you cross Steeles. And I'm rarely downtown. It doesn't make for very good debate when you put words in people's mouths and throw up red herrings.

As for serving downtown first, Transit City is Toronto's "answer" for that and it does not involve a DRL or any other subway so while this board seems just about unanimous in agreeing a DRL is needed, the mucky mucks disagree.

This is exactly the problem, on that we can agree. For the record, I'm not against the Yonge extension. But I do think that the DRL or downtown core line should be the TTC's highest priority, and that regional rail is the best rapid transit option for most, but not all, suburban areas.

 

[kEiThZ]

In your last post you said subways should always be built to nowhere. So which is it? These two viewpoints are mutually exclusive.

I support building subways to nowhere.....as long as that nowhere has the potential to mushroom into a nice dense neighbourhood that will make that subway worthwhile.

Two points. First, I never said I don't support the Yonge subway extension. What I don't support is constant suburban subway extensions at the expense of subway expansion in the central area. An adequate subway system was never built downtown and that needs to be addressed.

We aren't that far apart on our viewpoints then...see my posts in the other thread. I don't agree with the extensions being conducted without some upgrades along the existing lines either.

Second, a lot of people seem to have this idea that subways are necessary to build dense neighbourhoods in the suburbs, and that buildings subways will ensure that dense neighbourhoods will develop. Neither is the case. Even in Toronto there are numerous examples of sprawling communities with subway access, and dense, transit-supportive communities with no subway access. Heavy rail subways are completely unnecessary to develop dense walkable communities in the suburbs.

I agree that subways are not a pre-requisite for building dense walkable communities. But to connect those communities to the rest of the city you need something. Better it be train tracks than a highway.

You infer that regional rail isn't enough to serve the needs of a dense suburban neighbourhood, and that a subway will have to be built eventually. This isn't the case. Metrolinx's own reports state that regional rail (or express rail, as it calls it) can have similar capacity to subways. Look at a city like New York, where the subways don't go far into the suburbs. There are vast areas outside the city that are more dense and urban than any GTA suburb, and they're not served by subways at all. Insted, they rely on regional rail networks. Stations are located in tightly knit urban communities instead of GO Transit-style parking lots. Australian cities get by without real subways at all - their entire urban rail systems are regional rail.

Regional rail is much more capable that people here seem to think. I think people are stuck on the idea that regional rail = GO trains.

Herein lies the crux of our problem. In the GTA all we have for regional rail is GO transit. To serve VCC and RHC, it either has to be GO Transit or the subway. There are no in-between options for us. In that comparison, I am sure those communities will prefer the rocket over the jolly green giant. Perhaps that preference will change once the MO2020 upgrades to GO transit are finished.

Finally, what we should take to heart though is the fact that the subway has essentially reached its northern limit. Maybe one further extension to 16th could be contemplated. Perhaps we can talk about going westward into Mississauga. But otherwise, this is it. The time has come to refocus on subways inside the 416 once we get these extensions out of the way.

 

[kEiThZ]

Ansem, what you have to understand is that when the DRL was proposed in the 1980s, the downtown councillors led by Jack Layton aggressively fought the DRL out of fear that it would bring more development--especially office development.

Funny how that same bunch are now probably among the lines foremost supporters.

 

[Disparishun]

Perhaps, to complement the Yonge extension, we should try to curry support for the DRL based on the corridor of minority groups and social need that exists along Don Mills.

I know this was meant partly in jest, but it is actually a pretty good idea. Especially given that every little bit helps, an analysis like that would bring more support for the DRL.

 

[unimaginative2]

Funny how that same bunch are now probably among the lines foremost supporters.

Only extremely recently. I spoke to several downtown councillors about the DRL a few years ago and the response was "We don't build subways any more. The future is streetcars in their own right-of-way."

 

[urbanfan89]

Looks like we're having a serious outbreak of Groupthink at City Hall.

 

[MisterF]

Herein lies the crux of our problem. In the GTA all we have for regional rail is GO transit. To serve VCC and RHC, it either has to be GO Transit or the subway. There are no in-between options for us. In that comparison, I am sure those communities will prefer the rocket over the jolly green giant. Perhaps that preference will change once the MO2020 upgrades to GO transit are finished.

You're right, our opinions might not be too far from each other's. But I have to disagree with you here - we have more options than GO trains and subways, even if none are in service right now. A GO line could be electrified and upgraded for frequent service in less time than building a subway. I think that once the Lakeshore line is electrified and fares are integrated (eliminating the cost savings of the subway), the advantages of regional rail will become more obvious. Suburban regions might start demanding a regional rail line instead of a subway once they realize what they can get faster and cheaper.

 

[kEiThZ]

You're right, our opinions might not be too far from each other's. But I have to disagree with you here - we have more options than GO trains and subways, even if none are in service right now. A GO line could be electrified and upgraded for frequent service in less time than building a subway. I think that once the Lakeshore line is electrified and fares are integrated (eliminating the cost savings of the subway), the advantages of regional rail will become more obvious. Suburban regions might start demanding a regional rail line instead of a subway once they realize what they can get faster and cheaper.

On this I certainly agree with you. I meant to point out that it's GO as presently constituted that's the problem. One of my peeves with Metrolinx is their decision to limit electrification to only the Lakeshore line. However, at present the options are subway or slow GO. Once regional rail takes on greater prominence, perhaps the more local nature of subways will become apparent.

 

[RedRocket191]

On this I certainly agree with you. I meant to point out that it's GO as presently constituted that's the problem. One of my peeves with Metrolinx is their decision to limit electrification to only the Lakeshore line. However, at present the options are subway or slow GO. Once regional rail takes on greater prominence, perhaps the more local nature of subways will become apparent.

That's not exactly true. The Lakeshore line electrification is a priority project, but it's very likely that other lines scheduled to become regional express could get electrified as well. I would guess a 75% chance for the Georgetown corridor. Even some of the other lines could become electrified in the longer term.

Of course, I don't think we should count the modern DMU out. They can provide just about the same level of service as an EMU. In fact, some of the ICE 3 trainsets in Germany are DMUs.

 

[xtremesniper]

I think a major problem with getting support from citizens of Toronto is that while most people in York Region don't view Steeles Ave as the end of the world, those living on the south end of it do.

It's hard to convince Torontonians that never cross that border that there is anything more than just farm lands in the 905, and thus strong opposition exists. We need to stop thinking just based on our regions, and start thinking more about the GTA as a whole.

 

[jks]

I think a major problem with getting support from citizens of Toronto is that while most people in York Region don't view Steeles Ave as the end of the world, those living on the south end of it do.

It's hard to convince Torontonians that never cross that border that there is anything more than just farm lands in the 905, and thus strong opposition exists. We need to stop thinking just based on our regions, and start thinking more about the GTA as a whole.

While I agree with you that Steeles is not a giant cliff after which there is nothing, the TTC is the city's agency, and therefore Toronto's needs need to be addressed first.

The DRL is a vital subway line that will become necessary, whether or not the York extensions are built. And, after all, Toronto needs the DRL more than Wal Mart needs a subway.

The TTC screwed up by adding the Bloor-Yonge expansion costs into the cost of the RHC line, INSTEAD of adding the costs of the DRL. I really don't understand. The DRL would be the least expensive of all the lines at the moment, and it would carry the most passengers. This is wasteful. The B-Y expansion wont even be needed if the DRL were in place.

And back to that bus terminal!! Why must each of the stations be so cavernous. Why can't we pays starchitects to rebuild the downtown stations instead of this.

I really do think the extensions into YOrk are needed, I really do, but if they are built before the DRL, the Yonge line would be at 120% capacity.

 

[xtremesniper]

I agree. The DRL is definitely important, and I also agree that they should consider that first before a redesign of Bloor station. However, it seems like the TTC is trying to do everything it can to delay the DRL for whatever reason. The idea has been kicking around for a few decades now. What's taking so long to get it started?

I would have benefited a lot from the DRL back when I was working downtown. Instead of taking the Yonge line down to Union and walking a few blocks, I could have taken a bus to a station on the Bloor line and then connected to the DRL to get downtown. That is, assuming they built the DRL along Front Street like originally planned... Not this Queen Street nonsense.