TTC: Yonge North Subway Extension (Finch-Richmond Hill) (Unfunded/Planned)

[hw621]

and a future NHL franchise... dont mock

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/markham-approves-funding-deal-for-nhl-size-arena-1.1368717

not sure if you are sarcastic or not, but this one is dead

 

[sixrings]

not sure if you are sarcastic or not, but this one is dead

Damn I was looking for Leaf tickets yesterday and realized I could not afford them. Also it would make a great motivator for a subway extension. Maybe Markham could go for a NFL team beside its mall instead.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

It's the line you love to hate - still alive and kicking, every now and then...

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/yonge-subway-extension-1.4842375

 

[W. K. Lis]

It's the line you love to hate - still alive and kicking, every now and then...

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/yonge-subway-extension-1.4842375

Wonder if they'll change their tune with RER on the Richmond Hill GO Line? From link.

They'll then demand all-day and all-week service on the Richmond GO.

 

[robmausser]

Wonder if they'll change their tune with RER on the Richmond Hill GO Line? From link.

Investing in the Richmond Hill line would be a better bang for your buck IMO.

Even if you include the floodwater prevention in the lower don valley area, as well as using the CP Don Branch. You could offer two levels of service with the Don Branch and the current route.

Then, once the Richmond Hill RER has been up and running, evaluate if a northern extension of Line 1 is necessary.

This would be after the Downtown Relief Line is built. So there is no overloading of an already packed Line 1.

 

[44 North]

Investing in the Richmond Hill line would be a better bang for your buck IMO.

Even if you include the floodwater prevention in the lower don valley area, as well as using the CP Don Branch. You could offer two levels of service with the Don Branch and the current route.

Then, once the Richmond Hill RER has been up and running, evaluate if a northern extension of Line 1 is necessary.

This would be after the Downtown Relief Line is built. So there is no overloading of an already packed Line 1.

Would probably need a grade-separation between Don Branch and NorthTO sub, as well as Doncaster Diamond. Really though those two would be small potatoes relative to the laundry list of costly/complex grade-separations we have going forward with GO expansion. Thinking $50-75M each, and no auto or nimby issues.

 

[Northern Light]

Would probably need a grade-separation between Don Branch and NorthTO sub, as well as Doncaster Diamond. Really though those two would be small potatoes relative to the laundry list of costly/complex grade-separations we have going forward with GO expansion. Thinking $50-75M each, and no auto or nimby issues.

Richmond Hill got backburnered due to the flood mitigation and other costs in the lower trunk of the route and the complexity of environmental issues as well.

As someone w/knowledge of the options contemplated, including grade-separating Pottery Road, or swinging the alignment to hug the DVP till north of Pottery these are not 50M options, add at least one zero (when adding flood protection and twin track alignment)

Richmond Hill will not be getting big bucks anytime soon.

 

[mdrejhon]

Then, once the Richmond Hill RER has been up and running, evaluate if a northern extension of Line 1 is necessary.

This would be after the Downtown Relief Line is built. So there is no overloading of an already packed Line 1.

What if DRL and Richmond Hill RER becomes the same thing? (Say, 50 years from now)

Some of the multiple suggested routes for the DRL switches it from the tunnel to the GO corridor right before Oriole stations.

This gives the opportunity to extend the DRL via the Richmond Hill line.

No word if it was a separate subway track alongside, or replacement of Richmond Hill trains, but the concept caught my attention.

Theoretically, Richmond Hill RER becomes a subway of very frequent single-deck trains instead of 15-to-30-minute GO trains.

That way, you save money on needing to rehabilitate Don Valley tracks.

If subways becomes part of Metrolinx, this scenario is actually apparently much more likely to happen -- not sure if this is ideal -- but there you go.

Another scenario is building a mini Union Station North at roughly Langstaff GO station where DRL+YongeExtension+407Transitway+RER+Northlanderlike-services can interchange. Don Valley can still be remeditated separately of DRL+RER for future express train services (including Northlander-like services) corridorwidth and/or advanced signalling allowing. Obviously, this is an ultralongterm thing, e.g. 50 year timescales.

 

[Kitsune]

It was said in the first planning meetings the Thorncliffe - Victoria Park Route was showing the highest ridership - that is a long way away from the Richmond Hill Go corridor. We'll find out the preferred route late this year or early next year if they stick to schedule.

 

[Hopkins123]

It was said in the first planning meetings the Thorncliffe - Victoria Park Route was showing the highest ridership - that is a long way away from the Richmond Hill Go corridor. We'll find out the preferred route late this year or early next year if they stick to schedule.

A subway station at Concorde Place would be so neat, likewise @VP and Lawrence.

 

[44 North]

Richmond Hill got backburnered due to the flood mitigation and other costs in the lower trunk of the route and the complexity of environmental issues as well.

As someone w/knowledge of the options contemplated, including grade-separating Pottery Road, or swinging the alignment to hug the DVP till north of Pottery these are not 50M options, add at least one zero (when adding flood protection and twin track alignment)

Richmond Hill will not be getting big bucks anytime soon.

If you read what I wrote I'm referring to two specific grade-separations. Interestingly and seemingly unbeknownst to many RH is actually getting - in the present - moderate investment. Extension, mammoth new station, and minor flood protection (think 2-5/5-10yr flood scenario not 500). Aside from LSW it's like the only active GO extension so not exactly backburnered.

 

[Kitsune]

Well... there was the oddball metrolinx proposal of a eglinton station on the CP Mainline. And now that the leaside spur no longer runs through the premiers riding, maybe they will be pushing hard for a Leaside spur re-activation ?

 

[Neutrino]

Honestly, given the amount of traffic (and latent demand for transit) we should probably have both RH line RER and DRL North to Steeles as full bore subway.

 

[BurlOak]

If you read what I wrote I'm referring to two specific grade-separations. Interestingly and seemingly unbeknownst to many RH is actually getting - in the present - moderate investment. Extension, mammoth new station, and minor flood protection (think 2-5/5-10yr flood scenario not 500). Aside from LSW it's like the only active GO extension so not exactly backburnered.

If the Richmond Hill GO line is out of commission due to flooding for a couple of days every 10 years - that is not that bad of a record. I am assuming that by 10 year flood design means that the train in impassible, and not that there is track damage every 10 years.

It's even more acceptable if Yonge subway extends to Richmond Hill so there are alternate ways to reach the various GO stations with combinations of TTC and York Transit (which would be free in these emergencies).

 

[W. K. Lis]

If the Richmond Hill GO line is out of commission due to flooding for a couple of days every 10 years - that is not that bad of a record. I am assuming that by 10 year flood design means that the train in impassible, and not that there is track damage every 10 years.

It's even more acceptable if Yonge subway extends to Richmond Hill so there are alternate ways to reach the various GO stations with combinations of TTC and York Transit (which would be free in these emergencies).

Wonder how much flooding there would be on the Don River, once they rearrange the mouth.

From link.