York Region Transit: Viva service thread

[denfromoakvillemilton]

They have worse transit than York Region. Even during rush hour, most routes are running every 30 minutes and the best few are running every 15. On Sundays, all service stops at 8 pm. Aren't those hallmarks of a terrible transit system? Or have we been reading different threads...

YRT is perfectly fine if you're commuting within your municipality and terrible if you need to commute to another municipality. Oakville, and Burlington, and Durham, and even Toronto's local systems are no different. Go Transit is the difference there - they provide relatively good all-day service along the Lakeshore line, but not on the three lines that go into York Region (and on the two where it's planned, it doesn't seem to be coming anytime soon).

No they don't. They provide above average coverage or nearly all major and local routes. Many people that don't have a care have full accessibility to the transit in Halton, Peel and Durham. 8 pm is fine, but it could be later. Problem with YRT is high fares and a over focus on Viva.

Why are you living in Aurora if you don't have a car? It's literally more expensive to live there than in Richmond Hill, Thornhill, or Toronto - people are literally paying to be in a car-dependent area. This forum needs to accept that. Not everyone wants to live in "complete communities" and not everywhere needs to be a "complete community".

Right, so let's stop demanding subways everywhere then. But the thing is YR needs the subway because of places to grow, so the local transit has to meet the rising demand, and right now it doesn't look like that's happening.

 

[TOareaFan]

Right, so let's stop demanding subways everywhere then. But the thing is YR needs the subway because of places to grow, so the local transit has to meet the rising demand, and right now it doesn't look like that's happening.

Why does YR need subways because of places to Grow? Places to Grow impacts a lot of communities that don't need/won't get/won't ask for subway(s).

 

[amnesiajune]

Right, so let's stop demanding subways everywhere then. But the thing is YR needs the subway because of places to grow, so the local transit has to meet the rising demand, and right now it doesn't look like that's happening.

York Region needs some sort of link between Highway 7 and Toronto. A BRT wouldn't be sufficient beyond the next decade, and an LRT would be (A) orphaned, and (B) complicated south of Steeles because of inadequate space (not to mention the mess at Finch station, especially if the TTC is going to use the dedicated transitway for its buses). The costs of tunnelling and rebuilding some bridges means an LRT wouldn't be much cheaper than a subway extension, so why not just build the subway extension and provide a much better link between Toronto and Highway 7?

North of Highway 7, a subway is stupid. South of Highway 7 there's definitely a good case to be made for it.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

York Region needs some sort of link between Highway 7 and Toronto. A BRT wouldn't be sufficient beyond the next decade, and an LRT would be (A) orphaned, and (B) complicated south of Steeles because of inadequate space (not to mention the mess at Finch station, especially if the TTC is going to use the dedicated transitway for its buses). The costs of tunnelling and rebuilding some bridges means an LRT wouldn't be much cheaper than a subway extension, so why not just build the subway extension and provide a much better link between Toronto and Highway 7?

North of Highway 7, a subway is stupid. South of Highway 7 there's definitely a good case to be made for it.

That's what Langstaff GO would be for if we go down this road. But in seriousness, yes they do. But the point of the subway is not to have everyone drive there instead of Finch.

Why does YR need subways because of places to Grow? Places to Grow impacts a lot of communities that don't need/won't get/won't ask for subway(s).

Grow and density requirements @TJ O'Pootertoot can explain in detail.

 

[TOareaFan]

That's what Langstaff GO would be for if we go down this road. But in seriousness, yes they do. But the point of the subway is not to have everyone drive there instead of Finch.

Grow and density requirements @TJ O'Pootertoot can explain in detail.

so every community/municipality needs a subway to mee their growth and intensity requirements? I don't think so....many have to (and might just do so) without a subway. I guees another way to ask my question (and it is an honest one) is.....what unique challenges does Places to Grow place on York Region that it does not place on all the other municipalities that mean they can only achieve their targets with subways?

 

[ShonTron]

I was up at Gormley Station on Tuesday. There is a YRT bus, Route 15, that runs every 70 minutes during rush hours. It's a mostly rural route, connecting Stouffville with Oak Ridges/Yonge Street, but one bus operating every hour and ten minutes isn't going to get you much ridership.

Route 15 doesn't enter the GO station (I guess it would have to run every 80 minutes if it did that!), but stops on the street. Hilariously, you can't even access the eastbound YRT stop legally from the GO Station: the only legal crosswalk at the Gormley Station Entrance is north-south on the west side.

Gormley has 850 parking spots; it's one and only advantage is that it's next to the Highway 404 interchange. Otherwise it's useless as it's surrounded by Greenbelt-protected farmlands, on the Oak Ridges Moraine.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

so every community/municipality needs a subway to mee their growth and intensity requirements? I don't think so....many have to (and might just do so) without a subway. I guees another way to ask my question (and it is an honest one) is.....what unique challenges does Places to Grow place on York Region that it does not place on all the other municipalities that mean they can only achieve their targets with subways?

Explaining at length is fairly pointless or redundant.

Different centres have different targets and different geographical context. That Growth Plan sets minimum targets and YR has been one of the few places where those minimums are exceeded. Indeed, this corridor, because of the subway, will be the densest centre in the Golden Horseshoe. "you give us the tools, and we'll give you Smart Growth and then some," says Markham. This is, I hope we can agree, entirely laudable. (Then there's stuff about how they reverse-engineered their population figures but that's a whole other topic.)

Obviously (I think) Barrie(for example) doesn't need a subway, because it's nowhere near Toronto and has lower targets to hit. Different place.

And if that still doesn't convince you or anyone, it's officially in the new Growth Plan, explicitly proving it's a matter of provincial policy and not whiny 'my suburb needs a subway too! "silliness. A lot of the Growth Plan revisions strengthen the connections between transit and density and the YNSE is a big piece of that puzzle. They didn't put the UGC at Highway 7 because of the GO Station and the Home Depot.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

I was up at Gormley Station on Tuesday. There is a YRT bus, Route 15, that runs every 70 minutes during rush hours. It's a mostly rural route, connecting Stouffville with Oak Ridges/Yonge Street, but one bus operating every hour and ten minutes isn't going to get you much ridership.

Route 15 doesn't enter the GO station (I guess it would have to run every 80 minutes if it did that!), but stops on the street. Hilariously, you can't even access the eastbound YRT stop legally from the GO Station: the only legal crosswalk at the Gormley Station Entrance is north-south on the west side.

Gormley has 850 parking spots; it's one and only advantage is that it's next to the Highway 404 interchange. Otherwise it's useless as it's surrounded by Greenbelt-protected farmlands, on the Oak Ridges Moraine.

View attachment 108886

Now that's ugly and what I'm talking about. Would not be acceptable in Halton.

 

[TOareaFan]

Explaining at length is fairly pointless or redundant.

Different centres have different targets and different geographical context. That Growth Plan sets minimum targets and YR has been one of the few places where those minimums are exceeded. Indeed, this corridor, because of the subway, will be the densest centre in the Golden Horseshoe. "you give us the tools, and we'll give you Smart Growth and then some," says Markham. This is, I hope we can agree, entirely laudable. (Then there's stuff about how they reverse-engineered their population figures but that's a whole other topic.)

Obviously (I think) Barrie(for example) doesn't need a subway, because it's nowhere near Toronto and has lower targets to hit. Different place.

And if that still doesn't convince you or anyone, it's officially in the new Growth Plan, explicitly proving it's a matter of provincial policy and not whiny 'my suburb needs a subway too! "silliness. A lot of the Growth Plan revisions strengthen the connections between transit and density and the YNSE is a big piece of that puzzle. They didn't put the UGC at Highway 7 because of the GO Station and the Home Depot.

It is not about whining for more suburban subways....it was a simple, honest question....what are the unique factor that define the need for these two subway extensions....what is unique (as was suggested in the first post I replied to) about York's geography or targets that means they can only be achieved with a subway while a lot of these other Urban Growth Centres will never (should never ) see a subway but are expected to achieve the growth targets set for their UGC?

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

what are the unique factor that define the need for these two subway extensions....what is unique (as was suggested in the first post I replied to) about York's geography or targets that means they can only be achieved with a subway while a lot of these other Urban Growth Centres will never (should never ) see a subway but are expected to achieve the growth targets set for their UGC?

This has been discussed ad nauseum on the Yonge Subway thread and I'm loathe to go on about it at length again. Here's the (second) short answers/elaborations:
-First, you're making a fundamental error: As I said, the targets are MINIMUMS. So everyone has to meet them but, as work by Neptis has shown, the vast majority of GGH municipalities have treated the MINIMUMS as MAXIMUMS. Which is to say, almost no one except Markham, Vaughan and Waterloo have set their 2031 intensification targets above 40%. Downtown and Yonge/Eg are the only existing UGCs above their density targets.

So, if you're asking whether they can hit the target in Markham or Vaughan with less infrastructure, the answer is "probably, sure."
But if you want them to EXCEED the target, they will obviously require more.
Making that investment, hoping a subway will lead to a large-scale, urban TOD in (for example) St. Catherines, is obviously silly.
You do it where it makes sense geographically (ie just outside Toronto, where direct connections to its network are) and where you have a municipality that is not only amenable to intensification but willing to go the extra mile.

If all you want to see is every municipality creep up to the minimums, by all means, nickle and dime them. Or you can realize there are 25 UGCs but they're not all created equal.

-Again, proximity to Toronto: Not one of the other UGCs is so close to Toronto and particularly not along a contiguous urban corridor. Which is to say, intensification is already continuous along Yonge from the 401 north. You would be constraining the natural market forces if you didn't maximize the infrastructure which, by the way, is a key policy in the Provincial Policy Statement.

-In the case of the Langstaff UGC (as I've explained several times, often to people who don't quite get it), there are major constraints as there is only one road in and out. So, when the Secondary Plan was developed, after YNSE was proposed, they worked backwards from the assumption the transit would bear the brunt of the transportation capacity and the road very little. This is the opposite of how developments are typically planned. The density and population figures were then reverse-engineered from the capacities of the various modes (YRT, Viva, GO, Transitway, Subway) converging at the site.
Ergo, you could swap in an LRT or even a BRT but it would - and this is explicitly spelled out in the Secondary Plan - lead to a lowering of densities and population/job targets. So the subway is hardwired into the planning.

-This is not true of VMC. the subway there "makes sense" because it already made sense to go to nearby York U and then the 407, where the province (allegedly) plans to run an east-west regional BRT. I'd be happy to agree that, unlike Markham and RH, Vaughan has not maximized the potential a subway offers in its planning targets but it's also early days. And the larger principle about doubling down where and when you can still stands.

That's my honest answer to the honest questions.

 

[Leo_Chan]

Relating to the development of Langstaff Gateway and Richmond Hill Centre Area.

Page 29: http://archives.york.ca/councilcommitteearchives/pdf/rpt 5 cls 1-15.pdf
Page 264: https://www.richmondhill.ca/en/shared-content/resources/documents/OMB-partially-approved-Official-Plan.pdf

These documents show a Cedar Ave extension under Hwy 7/407 that will connect Langstaff Rd to High Tech Rd, adding a connection from the North. It also shows a Garden Ave extension from the Yonge/Hwy 7 Connector Rd to Bayview Ave, which would mainly serve the redevelopment all the big stores along High Tech Rd (Walmart, Loblaws, Staples, Home Depot, etc.).

 

[amnesiajune]

Gormley has 850 parking spots; it's one and only advantage is that it's next to the Highway 404 interchange.

The only reason they built that station is to be right next to Highway 404 - people commuting on the highway can drop off their car and take the train to Union or Richmond Hill Centre.

 

[Leo_Chan]

I was up at Gormley Station on Tuesday. There is a YRT bus, Route 15, that runs every 70 minutes during rush hours. It's a mostly rural route, connecting Stouffville with Oak Ridges/Yonge Street, but one bus operating every hour and ten minutes isn't going to get you much ridership.

Route 15 doesn't enter the GO station (I guess it would have to run every 80 minutes if it did that!), but stops on the street. Hilariously, you can't even access the eastbound YRT stop legally from the GO Station: the only legal crosswalk at the Gormley Station Entrance is north-south on the west side.

Gormley has 850 parking spots; it's one and only advantage is that it's next to the Highway 404 interchange. Otherwise it's useless as it's surrounded by Greenbelt-protected farmlands, on the Oak Ridges Moraine.

View attachment 108886

Do you know if the parking spaces get mostly used? How many people did you see use the kiss and ride?

 

[ShonTron]

The parking lot was about half full, and I took the first train up that arrived there (the 16:30 from Union). It's not unused, and it's convenient, I'm sure for some northern York Region commuters, being right off the 404. There were about 10 cars in the Kiss and Ride.

Though I think either Gormley or Bloomington should have been built, partially because GO really could have used the new yard to reduce deadheads, but maybe not both stations. Bloomington looks like a palace, which won't support any provincial land use goals. It's on the Oak Ridges Moraine.

 

[44 North]

-In the case of the Langstaff UGC (as I've explained several times, often to people who don't quite get it), there are major constraints as there is only one road in and out. So, when the Secondary Plan was developed, after YNSE was proposed, they worked backwards from the assumption the transit would bear the brunt of the transportation capacity and the road very little. This is the opposite of how developments are typically planned. The density and population figures were then reverse-engineered from the capacities of the various modes (YRT, Viva, GO, Transitway, Subway) converging at the site.
Ergo, you could swap in an LRT or even a BRT but it would - and this is explicitly spelled out in the Secondary Plan - lead to a lowering of densities and population/job targets. So the subway is hardwired into the planning.

By all means argue about the political need for the extension. But what you're saying here about Langstaffville, again, doesn't make sense. You're talking about a single inline station, of a peripheral extension, in an outer suburb. Obviously the capacity of Line 1 isn't required for the demand at that station. Absolute top end best case has Langstaff's ridership at something like 3.7k in the peak hour. If an LRT has the required capacity, it can meet the demand. And it obviously could since 3.7k isn't all that extreme. In other words a system with the capacity would not lead to "a lowering of the densities and population/job targets".