Dan416
Senior Member
It wasn't homework for you specifically. Was just curious.
|
|
|
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
ARG1
Senior Member
Sure... or we could focus on the massive swaths of parking lots and abandoned yellow belt that will be a lot easier to redevelop.
First, I don't know the last time Viva Blue has run a non-artic bus, but I digress. Second, 6m is barely enough to handle current demands. Remember we're planning for the future here, and considering not just what's there right now, but the developments that have already been committed and are being made. That 6m will quite realistically go down very rapidly. They introduced Viva Blue 'B' last year for a reason, the amount of demand on the corridor south of Bernard is far more than what can be handled by evenly timed short turns. This is also not factoring the many bus routes that operate on Yonge Street south of RHC that aren't called Viva Blue (there are many). Third, if as a region we're planning for the 407 corridor to be a main circulator artery (which we are), a high capacity Finch <--> RHC connection becomes vital not just for the York Region commuters heading to Toronto, but also North York residents travelling to the northern reaches of the GTHA. That is a huge amount of demand that will need to be supplied in a necessarily transit oriented future.
Finally, and most importantly, I find your required target of reaching that target capacity of 1000-1400 to be concerning. If I were to somehow give you a list of facts that contributed to the section reaching anywhere near that capacity, this discussion wouldn't be about building a subway, but about building several different subways or something even higher capacity. The fact that the Yonge Line just south of Bloor-Yonge is reaching that capacity limit is like the fundamental reason why it is so crucial that we build projects like GO Expansion and the Ontario Line, the mere idea that a subway can only be justified if it reaches that capacity threshold is insane. By that logic we can probably justify the idea that no part of the Toronto Subway outside of the U is needed and shouldn't have been built. I ride Line 2 off peak all the time, and very rarely have I ever seen even every seat be taken. There is absolutely no reason that maxing out train capacity should be our target for capacity needs.
I have no idea how you plan to do that without straight up bulldozing an arterial through neighbourhoods, which even if we go down that route only raises the price stakes even higher. Is it justifiable to spend billions of dollars bulldozing an arterial through existing neighbourhoods, just so you can have a flat intersection, just so you can justify rezoning existing housing into high density housing, just to justify building the extension as a subway that doesn't deviate from Yonge. Meanwhile, we have empty land RIGHT THERE ready for the taking.
Northern Light
Superstar
We need to close off this discussion. Its not going well, and its leaving a very negative impression of you, with me and many others.
Moving along.......any land can be redeveloped.........and intensified.......why not greefield north of New Market?
Because its more expensive to serve is the answer.
You want the intensification to occur accretively to where it already happened, and to create critical mass Dropping it into random spots that aren't logical except that they profit certain owners is not sound planniing.
Fine, capacity of 77 every 6M instead of 1,000 to 1,400.
You act as if I'm suggesting there not be a subway ever. That's not what I'm suggesting.
I'm saying service on existing routes, using existing vehicles should get better before we move to a subway.
I'm also suggesting that YRT's supporting and feeding services are nothing short of pathetic.
The investment per capita is well below Mississauga, Brampton and Durham.
This is not what I said at any point and this typifies the reason this discussion must end. You're misrepresenting my view and making bad faith arguments without supporting evidence for no reason.
I have never been disrespectful to you, but I mostly certainly feel disrespected by you.
My patience is at an end.
turbanplanner
Senior Member
You have done this to me several times, with no apologies
It's crazy that it won't have electric service for decades after the decades from now that it opens
chrisw
Active Member
So I added up some numbers, Weekdays for the hour between 5pm-6pm, YRT sends 32 buses north from Finch Station. And GO sends 4 buses north.
bpbpbpbp
New Member
I'm interested in seeing how this one is supposed to work. I'd assume that since the Midtown Line would be freed up, that means the CP part of the missing like continues through the 407 right of way all the way to Agincourt, but CP would still need the MacTier subdivision from a 407 ROW through Caledon going north. Anyone think it might be a rush hour only train if it does happen? Or maybe MX adds more track infrastructure to the line for some level of 2WAD?
Lots that we could speculate about until we hear more from the PCs and if anything happens at all. Hopefully as the campaign continues the next 3 weeks, we hear some more about these plans.
SkylineHorizons
Active Member
WB62
Senior Member
To your reply I will say the Bolton Line has been worked on for multiple years now, and will likely happen regardless of the next government or if GO 2.0 comes to fruition.
ARG1
Senior Member
My goal is to not show disrespect, but rather to focus on the argument and what has been said. I'm not perfect at this, but whenever I post anything on this forum I try to always look past the author and simply focus on what is being said. I personally don't believe in the idea of personal merit unless the person has shown a high level of authority on a particular subject matter. I try to be as author neutral as reasonable and only ever focus on what is being said, rather than who is saying it.
That being said I want to quickly address this:
Now I actually must apologize in that I actually completely missed this specific line you wrote. This is 100% a my bad and I do want to sincerely apologize for this. Part of my anger is that you put so much emphasis on the 1400 capacity trains that it really felt like you were using it as some sort of standard for what you want to expect from a bus corridor, because ignoring that line:
This really feels like you're making the argument that the bus must meet, or at least be close to this level of demand before we can start discussing a subway.
Northern Light
Superstar
I think I've established my bona fides on what I know is going on behind the scenes....... as well as many technical aspects of projects. But lets leave it at that. You will have your own take.
I'm not arguing against a subway here. I am arguing for building it better; and for using any line north of Steeles as leverage to force York Region to step up and invest in its transit system properly, instead of the shambolic 1/2 effort it puts forward today.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
This argument about Yonge North subway alignments is irrelevant to the topic of this thread. Regardless of whether we consider the Yonge North realignment to be good or bad, @Northern Light 's point still stands that the Ford government failed to deliver on their promise of quickly and affordably building rapid transit.
They made several decisions that should have accelerated construction and reduced costs, such as bringing the DRL/OL up to the surface east of downtown and realigning Yonge North, but for whatever reason, timelines and costs have continued to spiral out of control regardless.
My guess is that the politicians were unaware of how much Metrolinx's bureaucracy was bogging down projects. They have the power to force Metrolinx to stop creating roadblocks for its own projects, but I think it's only recently that it is becoming clear where the cost overruns are coming from.
They made several decisions that should have accelerated construction and reduced costs, such as bringing the DRL/OL up to the surface east of downtown and realigning Yonge North, but for whatever reason, timelines and costs have continued to spiral out of control regardless.
My guess is that the politicians were unaware of how much Metrolinx's bureaucracy was bogging down projects. They have the power to force Metrolinx to stop creating roadblocks for its own projects, but I think it's only recently that it is becoming clear where the cost overruns are coming from.
turbanplanner
Senior Member
Which bureaucracy are we OK getting rid of?
I get jerking around homeowners is a bad look and nobody would advocate for that, but then we have even with all their considerations scenarios where cars will be covered with dust every day in the neighbourhood, construction people taking all of the street parking, etc.
WB62
Senior Member
Last edited by a moderator:
T3G
Senior Member
Not GO's fault, but utter nonsense nonetheless.
