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

[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.

 

[Rapparee]

I’m the first to admit that I’m not a transportation engineer nor an urban planner. But I just can’t see how a subway extension to Richmond Hill makes any sense. An extension to Steeles seems to make a lot of sense for both Toronto and for York. There is nowhere near the population density to support a subway north of there, not until Richmond Hill Centre, maybe, one day, if all things go as planned up there. The other thing, and this bugs me about the debate around TTC expansion from surburban politicians and the Province, is that subways are not commuter rail. Richmond Hill is just too far. The distance and the surburban form scream GO train not subway. Demands for subways from the mayor of Markham and the like are political hubris and don’t seem like good, value for (extraordinary) money transportation planning.

Can someone convince me that both from both capital and long term operating expense standpoints that fixing all that needs to be fixed on the Richmond Hill line to provide 10-15 minute service would not still be massively cheaper than building a subway a low density surburb?

 

[jys]

I’m the first to admit that I’m not a transportation engineer nor an urban planner. But I just can’t see how a subway extension to Richmond Hill makes any sense. An extension to Steeles seems to make a lot of sense for both Toronto and for York. There is nowhere near the population density to support a subway north of there, not until Richmond Hill Centre, maybe, one day, if all things go as planned up there. The other thing, and this bugs me about the debate around TTC expansion from surburban politicians and the Province, is that subways are not commuter rail. Richmond Hill is just too far. The distance and the surburban form scream GO train not subway. Demands for subways from the mayor of Markham and the like are political hubris and don’t seem like good, value for (extraordinary) money transportation planning.

Can someone convince me that both from both capital and long term operating expense standpoints that fixing all that needs to be fixed on the Richmond Hill line to provide 10-15 minute service would not still be massively cheaper than building a subway a low density surburb?

I am also not an expert, but I would guess that it's less about serving the communities along the extension than about network connectivity. Currently, a lot of people pass Richmond Hill Centre from north and east via the VIVA services on Yonge and Highway 7 to get to the TTC Subway. All the aforementioned VIVA buses must go down Yonge Street to reach Finch Station. As far as I know, there are no bus lanes on Yonge Street between Highway 7 and Finch, so these buses must operate in mixed traffic, which significantly decreases their average speed as well as reliability. Therefore, extending the subway to Richmond Hill Centre would solve all said problems. Given the issue that I just described, this extension may even work well as a direct one-stop extension because like you said the density en route is quite low.

 

[Leo_Chan]

I’m the first to admit that I’m not a transportation engineer nor an urban planner. But I just can’t see how a subway extension to Richmond Hill makes any sense. An extension to Steeles seems to make a lot of sense for both Toronto and for York. There is nowhere near the population density to support a subway north of there, not until Richmond Hill Centre, maybe, one day, if all things go as planned up there. The other thing, and this bugs me about the debate around TTC expansion from surburban politicians and the Province, is that subways are not commuter rail. Richmond Hill is just too far. The distance and the surburban form scream GO train not subway. Demands for subways from the mayor of Markham and the like are political hubris and don’t seem like good, value for (extraordinary) money transportation planning.

Can someone convince me that both from both capital and long term operating expense standpoints that fixing all that needs to be fixed on the Richmond Hill line to provide 10-15 minute service would not still be massively cheaper than building a subway a low density surburb?

I know this is my biased opinion, but still read what I have to say.

There is some evidence that shows an extension of the Yonge Line to Highway 7 is beneficial. There are some maps online that show a gap in the network at Yonge between Highway 7 and Finch (or Steeles if it use extended by 2 stops only).

I fully support Richmond Hill Line RER, but the fact is that it is hard to add stations south of Lawrence and flood protection and double tracking is necessary.

On the other hand, extending the subway north is quite trivial and having a major interchange station at Highway 7 is much friendlier than on st Steeles.

Another thing to keep in mind is how YRT/Viva structured it’s Viva Rapidway BRTs. Viva Blue, Purple, and Orange all funnel to RHC and people who want to continue south have to transfer to Viva Blue, and then to the subway at Finch. If all the routes terminated at Finch (or Steeles) then that would more that double the number of buses on Yonge, assuming they don’t reduce Viva Blue’s south of RHC service.

I think that if the subway isn’t built to Highway 7, then Viva should rethink their rapid transit network to better connect with GO transit and have more North-South routes that connect with the TTC at Steeles Ave (bus transfers), Finch/Steeles Station (Line 1), VMC (Line 1), Don Mills Station (Line 4), Humber College (Line 6), and STC (Line 2).

At the end of the day, the justification of the YNSE is from a network perspective and not a Toronto-only view.

 

[Neutrino]

Can we please stop repeating that density doesn't justify line X? Because the TTC subway ridership is driven by bus routes. Line 1 runs through some low density areas as well (and had substantial ridership in previous years before much of the current high density development in certain areas). Now, that doesn't mean we waste money. But the density argument doesn't always hold. Just a pet peeve of mine.