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

Glorified streetcars:

- All door boarding
- Higher capacity
- Higher speed
- Separated from traffic
- Fewer stops
- Transit priority

I'd like to know where I can ride these glorified streetcars.

Kitchener. Soon.

What are you talking about. The Sheppard East LRT opened in Spetember....

Oh wait. Nevermind. Thanks Rob Ford.

I'm still absolutely furious about that cancellation. The Sheppard East LRT would have dramatically improved my commute. Oh well. Back to wasting hours of my life sitting in busses... :confused:
 
Last edited:
Do not bild LRT on Finch! Busses are sufficient enough. Use the money for other projects , like West Lakefront LRT.

North east Etobickoe desperately needs rapid transit. It kills me seeing how poorly covered that area of the city is. Even with the new projects Etobickoe will be screwed over (Scarborough has had almost all of the spotlight). At the very least Etobickoe will also need the Eglinton West LRT.

Waterfront isn't as much of a priority now that the area will be having 15 minute GO to Union.
 
North east Etobickoe desperately needs rapid transit. It kills me seeing how poorly covered that area of the city is. Even with the new projects Etobickoe will be screwed over (Scarborough has had almost all of the spotlight). At the very least Etobickoe will also need the Eglinton West LRT.

Waterfront isn't as much of a priority now that the area will be having 15 minute GO to Union.

That's why I suggested the west DRL to Kipling and Steeles. Etobicoke needs a N-S line badly. Forget numbers, it's about making the commute easier. And still Build finch and eglinton, because not everyone is going downtown.
 
There is a LOT of interesting stuff to chew on in this new Neptis report on The Big Move but I'll just cut to the chase and post their analysis of the Yonge extension since that what this thread's about, eh.

http://www.neptis.org/sites/default...olinxs_big_move_neptis_foundation_schabas.pdf

(Starting on P.44)

The Yonge Subway is Toronto’s most intensively used transit line, carrying more than 700,000 passengers per day. While it is now operating near to capacity south of Bloor, the diversion of passengers from east and west on to GO services, as we have already suggested, would release capacity for more passengers to travel into the downtown on the Yonge Subway. This will allow further extension of the line. Our analysis indicates that the scheme is worthwhile with benefits well in excess of costs. Net benefits can be increased further and costs to the taxpayer reduced by deferring construction of most of the intermediate stations, unless developers make substantial contributions to costs. As with the Vaughan extension, revenues and ridership can be increased by using smart pricing.
There is now continuous development beyond Richmond Hill. There are also intensive bus and BRT routes on intersecting east-west streets, with many routes turning south to connect with the subway at Finch. Extension of the subway 6.8 km to Richmond Hill Centre seems an obvious next step.
Metrolinx has prepared a Benefits Case Analysis for this extension, and it contains most of the information we need to evaluate the scheme. TTC has also provided some relevant data. TTC has estimated costs of $2.4 billion (in 2008 dollars), including six new stations and the renovation of the Finch station.
Incremental rolling stock and operating and maintenance costs would be about 80% as much as for the Vaughan extension, which is 8.6 km. It would significantly reduce travel times, and support transit-oriented development in the corridor.
We believe that costs can be reduced about $800 million by deferring construction of stations at Cummer, Clark, Royal Orchard, and Langstaff/Longbridge. At about $200 million each, the cost of these stations will far exceed the incremental riders and benefits, perhaps 90% of which would be captured with an extension to a single terminal at Richmond Hill Centre, perhaps with one intermediate station at Steeles Avenue. The other stations should be added over time in partnership with developers: Vancouver and London have shown how local developers can be persuaded to pay for intermediate stations. Deferring stations will also reduce incremental rolling stock and O&M costs Ridership might be 25% higher than on the Vaughan extension, reflecting the higher density of development.
TTC suggests ridership at Finch might grow by 8,400 in the peak hour or perhaps 80,000 per day by 2031. Obviously much of this growth would happen even if the subway is not extended. We assume a daily incremental ridership of 150,000 with six stations, of which 50,000 are new riders. Ridership would be reduced 10% if there are only two new stations. Incremental ridership could increase about 50% to 2033 with complementary policies, somewhat less than on the Vaughan extension because the traffic will be starting at a higher base. Incremental revenues are about three times O&M costs. There could also be substantial benefits to TTC of having a yard at the north end of the line. Currently, TTC must run about 10 trains empty each morning and evening from Wilson to Finch, a distance of 30 km. These trains are apparently crewed with two employees, even though there are no passengers and no need to open or close the doors. The yard could be located under the hydro lines, immediately south and west of the Yonge-407 interchange. TTC could store trains there overnight, and some drivers could be assigned to sign on for work there.
Time savings to existing passengers will be similar to the Vaughan extension. Again, much of this benefit could be captured with smart pricing, reducing the net cost to the taxpayer. As on the Vaughan extension, fares might be $5 for travel from north of Steeles to downtown, $4 for passengers boarding at Steeles, but with a lower fare of perhaps $3 for passengers travelling from Richmond Hill, but all the way not to downtown Toronto (perhaps to York Mills). Smart pricing is possible with the PRESTO smartcard.
Road user benefits are likely to be similar to those for the Vaughan extension, about $5 per new rider, because trips will be relatively long and originating in the suburbs.

There's a lot to say there but I'll just say a couple of fast things:
1) They already located the rail yard and it is north of the Yonge-407 interchange. It's kind of weird to me they don't know that. The hydro corridor is primarily where the parking is going to be, on the east side. On the west side, SOUTH of 407 is exactly where Langstaff Gateway is going to be. I suppose you could try to put something under the hugely overbuilt big box parking on the north side....but, again, they already located the yard.

2) I can kind of understand the idea of incremental station implementation but Steeles still seems like an absolute necessity. Langstaff/Longbridge really is too because it's where the commuter parking lots will be, and it's needed to unlock the Langstaff development.
 
Sorry , I meant East Lakefront LRT...

You know that you can edit your comment if you make a mistake right?


Well we will see at Yonge and Eglinton over the next few years how feasible it would be for all the other stations.

Sheppard and Eglinton would need a third platform and not even mentioning Bloor where the task seems almost impossible if we can't even consider expanding the size of the platform there today. Maybe a stop at Bay Station rather than Bloor-Yonge instead?

Yonge and Eglinton will be a normal interchange station like any other, and the abandoned bus terminal will provide enough space for construction. But for an express line under Yonge you need to somehow dig new stations and tunnels that are parallel and directly beneath the existing subway. I also can't imagine how many subway closures will need to occur if the Eglinton interchange alone will require 50 weekends of shutdowns. Is there any city in the world that is attempting to do something like this?


North east Etobickoe desperately needs rapid transit. It kills me seeing how poorly covered that area of the city is. Even with the new projects Etobickoe will be screwed over (Scarborough has had almost all of the spotlight). At the very least Etobickoe will also need the Eglinton West LRT.

At least Etobicoke has been relatively quiet during the Ford regime. Last thing we need is their voice calling for subways too. Eventually they will get the Eglinton and Finch West LRTs so they better not complain.
 
"Deferring construction" of those stations -- I wonder if York Region would agree to that if it meant starting construction sooner.
 
There is a LOT of interesting stuff to chew on in this new Neptis report on The Big Move but I'll just cut to the chase and post their analysis of the Yonge extension since that what this thread's about, eh.

http://www.neptis.org/sites/default...olinxs_big_move_neptis_foundation_schabas.pdf

(Starting on P.44)



There's a lot to say there but I'll just say a couple of fast things:
1) They already located the rail yard and it is north of the Yonge-407 interchange. It's kind of weird to me they don't know that. The hydro corridor is primarily where the parking is going to be, on the east side. On the west side, SOUTH of 407 is exactly where Langstaff Gateway is going to be. I suppose you could try to put something under the hugely overbuilt big box parking on the north side....but, again, they already located the yard.

2) I can kind of understand the idea of incremental station implementation but Steeles still seems like an absolute necessity. Langstaff/Longbridge really is too because it's where the commuter parking lots will be, and it's needed to unlock the Langstaff development.

You can build steeles and RHC and get to the other stuff later. If cost can be brought down now, then why not.
"Deferring construction" of those stations -- I wonder if York Region would agree to that if it meant starting construction sooner.

You are the biggest champion of this although you try to pretend otherwise.
 
God damn that report is interesting. Took me an hour to read through, skimming large portions, but that's information overload there. Gives me a lot to think about.
 
I'd actually would like to read that report. Why on earth is the TTC stubbornly keep on operating the Sheppard line until 2am every night? It closes later that the Yonge line.

TTC has their transition to blue night service based on last train times leaving downtown. If you catch the last train out you should be able to connect to all the full service routes.
 
Munro has problems with everything! But I agree with some of his points. "Cost-effectiveness," is a big thing in the report but there are different ways to assess "bang for the buck."

The DRL stuff is curtailed by the fact, as the author says, that it doesn't have the same data the other projects do. Metrolinx has already done a lot of analysis of the Yonge extension but the DRL process is just starting....which is Toronto's fault, but that's neither here nor there.

Like him, I need to give it a proper reading to really comment. Like he says they envision the UP express as the only major connection to the airport but I thought the 407 Transitway is supposed to go our there too; it looks it's nowhere in the report. I don't doubt there are shortfalls but it still seems like a good place to start. It's at least nice to see someone else talking about the extension as a virtual no-brainer, even if it means bringing some of the stations on later
 

Back
Top