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

Coruscanti Cognoscente said:
I definitely do not agree that there isn't a need. It's simply anti-Mississauga bias that something like the Yonge extension would be supported whereas a BD extension to MCC isn't.
Click to expand...

Sure, and its anti-Windsor Ontario bias that prevents them from having a subway too. Nothing to do with need, official plans, council support, or anything like that. Simply anti-Windsor bias.
 
Coruscanti Cognoscente said:
I definitely do not agree that there isn't a need. It's simply anti-Mississauga bias that something like the Yonge extension would be supported whereas a BD extension to MCC isn't.
Click to expand...

I'm sure it isn't your own biases and fetishes that prompt your subways to MCC/VCC/STC positions (electric GO isn't good enough!) because they sure aren't supported by any numbers.
 
Ervin said:
Yeah, everybody just hates Mississauga for some reason
Click to expand...

I missed the last anti-Mississauga meeting. What evil schemes did we plot to keep Mississauga down?

(The "Mississauga deserves a subway" argument seems particularly timely and shallow after all the "Scarborough deserves a subway" arguments this past week.)
 
Last edited:
CDL.TO said:
I missed the last anti-Mississauga meeting. What evil schemes did we plot to keep Mississauga down?

(The "Mississauga deserves a subway argument seems particularly timely and shallow after all the Scarborough deserves a subway arguments this past week.)
Click to expand...

Space had been set aside and roughed in at the Kipling Station on the side opposite the bus bays for a LRT to Mississauga back when the station was built and opened in 1980. Why hasn't Mississauga gotten around to use it? See we're nice to Mississauga.
 
Until and unless Mississauga follows York Region's lead and seriously proposes and lobbies for a subway extension, this is such a pointless discussion. Is any politician in Mississauga even talking about this?
 
M II A II R II K said:
A Yonge extension is questionable too. If that rail corridor in Thornhill can also be used for northern Commuter Rail service I would say extend the Yonge Line to that corridor and leave it at that.
Click to expand...

I've said this multiple other times in this thread but no, that rail corridor is not adequate.

The Yonge/7 area was designated by the province as an Urban Growth Centre in Places to Grow. The Langstaff/Richmond Hill Centre area alone is set to house about 50K residents and nearly as many jobs by 2031, in addition to the development already coming on Yonge Street itself.

If you kill the subway, they don't hit the density target and you get more sprawl and undermine the entire growth plan. All-day GO service is great but it doesn't do much to get the hundreds of buses now shuttling between 7 and Finch off the road. And all that's still ignoring the fact you could almost certainly support the subway with today's density, to say nothing of 20 years from now.


The Finch terminus is totally pointless and unnatural given what's to the north. The only thing more pointless than keeping it at Finch is bringing it up to Steeles. In terms of GTA transit projects that are totally unquestionable, I'd suggest it's awful hard to beat the Yonge extension, with the DRL running in second. (And since one has a complete EA and the other isn't on the short-term plan for Toronto or Metrolinx, it's easy to pick between those two as well...)
 
TJ O'Pootertoot said:
The Finch terminus is totally pointless and unnatural given what's to the north. The only thing more pointless than keeping it at Finch is bringing it up to Steeles.
Click to expand...

But Steeles would be logical from the standpoint that it would reach the relatively natural terminus of the city limits.
 
The 'city limits" are an abstract line, not a physical reality, nor a recognition of how human beings and vehicles move and certainly not relevant from a planning standpoint. Bringing the subway up to Steeles would fail to solve any number of obvious transportation problems in the corridor.

Unless you can look at this map and find see a defined "limit," my point stands.

It's just obsolete thinking, sorry.
 
Last edited:
TJ O'Pootertoot said:
The 'city limits" are an abstract line, not a physical reality, nor a recognition of how human beings and vehicles move and certainly not relevant from a planning standpoint. Bringing the subway up to Steeles would fail to solve any number of obvious transportation problems in the corridor.

Unless you can look at this map and find see a defined "limit," my point stands.

It's just obsolete thinking, sorry.
Click to expand...

it HUGELY relevant when York region just gives you a "one time check" to build it but don't contribute to help paying the operational cost just like on the Spadina line.

At least in Montreal, not only does Longueuil and Laval (who have subways stations) have to contribute to the yearly operational cost of the subway...so does the outer suburbs as well (over 89 of them farther away than Laval and Longueuil)
http://www.cyberpresse.ca/actualite...-les-banlieues-souhaitent-etre-consultees.php

Montreal made its case to the Quebec Government that the subway was beneficial to the other suburbs as well but weren't helping paying its maintenance although they were enjoying the benefits from it.

I'm still in disbelief that the city haven't made a similar case which could have freed more money for capital projects. York region and especially Vaughn are laughing for getting that subway and their growth is going to go through the roof for decades with a one time payment...

-Last time Laval refused to pay the operational cost to the Montreal Metro, Montreal threaten them to stop running the Metro to Laval. In the end, the province paid Montreal and Laval had to pay the Province back.

-Toronto politicians are ridiculously weak
 
Last edited:
Solid Snake said:
At least in Montreal, not only does Longueuil and Laval (who have subways stations) have to contribute to the yearly operational cost of the subway...so does the outer suburbs as well (over 89 of them farther away than Laval and Longueuil)
Click to expand...
AND you have to pay extra to travel to both of those locations on the subway in Montreal.
 
TJ O'Pootertoot said:
I've said this multiple other times in this thread but no, that rail corridor is not adequate.

The Yonge/7 area was designated by the province as an Urban Growth Centre in Places to Grow. The Langstaff/Richmond Hill Centre area alone is set to house about 50K residents and nearly as many jobs by 2031, in addition to the development already coming on Yonge Street itself.

If you kill the subway, they don't hit the density target and you get more sprawl and undermine the entire growth plan. All-day GO service is great but it doesn't do much to get the hundreds of buses now shuttling between 7 and Finch off the road. And all that's still ignoring the fact you could almost certainly support the subway with today's density, to say nothing of 20 years from now.


The Finch terminus is totally pointless and unnatural given what's to the north. The only thing more pointless than keeping it at Finch is bringing it up to Steeles. In terms of GTA transit projects that are totally unquestionable, I'd suggest it's awful hard to beat the Yonge extension, with the DRL running in second. (And since one has a complete EA and the other isn't on the short-term plan for Toronto or Metrolinx, it's easy to pick between those two as well...)
Click to expand...

Really? Because as I recall, York Region's own studies show subway demand on Yonge that projects roughly in line with current day Sheppard stubway and the Vaughan "North-South link" to be even lower at about half of that.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top