Woodbridge_Heights
Senior Member
I'm not saying it would be better at Finch BUT a lot of the people taking up those seats are coming from up north anyway so, assuming (for the sake of argument) ridership was roughly the same on opening day, isn't it better to have those people getting on in Richmond Hill instead of clogging up roads in buses or cars hauling down to Finch?
As for Woodbridge Heights' comment, the entire ethos behind the TTC for the past 50+ years has been using buses to feed into the subway system; that's kind of the point of having a hierarchy of modes, isn't it? Or we can just put them back in cars if that's more "sustainable"....
We can close the bus bays at Finch Station if you want to do an experiment in sustainability, I guess, unless I'm misundertanding.
All this for roughly 2000 peak hour passengers? Don't you get it? The rationale, unless I misunderstood, for the Yonge extension was that it would take dozens and dozens of buses off the roads and remove a transfer (ohhh that dreaded transfer) for riders who are heading down Yonge to the subway. When in fact the numbers from that study show that only 2000 riders will actually get on at RHC and Langstaff stations, meanwhile still 12000 passengers are still arriving at the subway via some sort of transfer. A transfer that will likely occur from the very same bus routes that we claim were going to be eliminated with the extension. No, instead all we've done is shift the transfer location further up the line by a few km.
Yes I get that it will be "regional transportation hub" what with GO trains, 407 Go transitways, VIVA transitways, and the subway but is the cost of the construction really worth it for 2000 people?
All you are doing is shifting the transfer point North, you are not eliminating many transfers and you are not going to remove as many buses as you claim from the surrounding streets.