Jump to content

York Region Transit \ Viva


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Mike said:

Since all of TTC bus routes (except for 97) at Steeles Station are east-west an entrance at Nipigon isn't very useful. However, changing the entrance between the Bay and 2001 AV to a signalized transit entrance would work.  I haven't heard of any proposals to redevelop Centerpoint mall only the strip malls along Steeles on the north side west of Yonge (there the plans are for huge redevelopment that certainly doesn't involve a bus terminal.

If the Esso Station is torn down on the north east corner, it could provide the room for the YRT terminal. Two new traffic lights would need to be added - one just north of Steeles and one just east of Yonge.  These new traffic lights certainly wouldn't help with moving traffic along in the area.  From that point of view an underground terminal  would be better.

Both Markham and Vaughan have Secondary Plans covering the corners on the north side of Steeles, which direct the highest density closest to the intersection (where the subway station is located). This will drive property values up, as you can squeeze more people onto it. This will make the cost of acquiring the land for the terminal to be more expensive.

I agree with @Gil, both the existing land uses and single land ownership on the SW corner make it the best candidate to host a terminal. I just hope they go with one integrated terminal for both TTC and YRT, and not the separate terminal stupidity that's going on at Pioneer Village. With Presto, it's much more feasible to have bus terminals outside the fare-paid area, so it might be possible to have a joint terminal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Articulated said:

Both Markham and Vaughan have Secondary Plans covering the corners on the north side of Steeles, which direct the highest density closest to the intersection (where the subway station is located). This will drive property values up, as you can squeeze more people onto it. This will make the cost of acquiring the land for the terminal to be more expensive.

I agree with @Gil, both the existing land uses and single land ownership on the SW corner make it the best candidate to host a terminal. I just hope they go with one integrated terminal for both TTC and YRT, and not the separate terminal stupidity that's going on at Pioneer Village. With Presto, it's much more feasible to have bus terminals outside the fare-paid area, so it might be possible to have a joint terminal.

Higher (potential) density would make the parking lot at Centerpoint more expensive as well.  If an integrated terminal is built in the parking lot on southwest corner then I would make a signalized entrance off Steeles (for TTC and 23/88/91) and at Nipigon (for remaining YRT routes and exit for TTC 97).  If the mall is concerned with loss of parking, they can build the bus terminal on the ground floor of a multi level parking structure (2 or more levels).

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mike said:

Higher (potential) density would make the parking lot at Centerpoint more expensive as well.  If an integrated terminal is built in the parking lot on southwest corner then I would make a signalized entrance off Steeles (for TTC and 23/88/91) and at Nipigon (for remaining YRT routes and exit for TTC 97).  If the mall is concerned with loss of parking, they can build the bus terminal on the ground floor of a multi level parking structure (2 or more levels).

Yes, but City of Toronto has been slower in creating/approving a Secondary Plan compared to the municipalities on the north side of Steeles. (Which is fair, they have many more areas to focus on...) So because the higher density hasn't been approved yet, the land speculators haven't raised it as high yet.

Regardless, land value around subway stations nowadays will be too valuable to waste with open-air bus terminals, especially with the recent provincial directive to maximize value out of development around stations. Any future bus terminals will probably be integrated into the base of a building.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Articulated said:

Both Markham and Vaughan have Secondary Plans covering the corners on the north side of Steeles, which direct the highest density closest to the intersection (where the subway station is located). This will drive property values up, as you can squeeze more people onto it. This will make the cost of acquiring the land for the terminal to be more expensive.

I agree with @Gil, both the existing land uses and single land ownership on the SW corner make it the best candidate to host a terminal. I just hope they go with one integrated terminal for both TTC and YRT, and not the separate terminal stupidity that's going on at Pioneer Village. With Presto, it's much more feasible to have bus terminals outside the fare-paid area, so it might be possible to have a joint terminal.

I'm hoping that it's a single terminal as well, as it would cut transfer times if you are switching simply between buses (YRT <> TTC) instead of connecting to the subway.  I hope the (pink) points used in the Metrolinx report (see Figure 16 on page 61 of the .pdf) are just exits for walkers to access the station and not say separate terminals -- in this case at the southwest and northeast corners.  A smaller YRT terminal if it were going to built separately could easily go in on that corner.  Whether the neighbours will be happy if it were included as part of a multi-storey redevelopment remains to be seen.  Tradeoff for living next to a future subway stop and the increase in property values.

TTC: Yonge North Subway Extension (Finch-Richmond Hill) (Unfunded/Planned)  | Page 452 | UrbanTorontoFigure 16: Walk Time to Station Entrance - Cummer Station

With the boundary between Vaughan and Markham being Yonge St. is there a chance this turns into a hot potato over which corner to build the terminal if they do indeed decide to ether build a separate one or Toronto/Centrepoint decide they don't want it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Gil said:

One of the primary reasons staff were able to reduce costs was by limiting the amount of excavation required for tunnels and stations. This is achieved by taking the northern segment of the alignment east of Yonge Street to meet the CN rail corridor, allowing the tracks to rise to the surface and run at grade, instead of underground.

The previous proposal also called for an underground train storage facility near the end of the extension, along with a bus terminal at Steeles station that was planned be built below the ground. Our design and planning teams determined that placing these facilities at ground level will significantly reduce costs while maintaining important benefits of the project.

Placing the train storage facility at surface level brings the proposal in line with the TTC’s five subway train maintenance and storage facilities, which are also above ground. This approach is common for transit support facilities all over the world. Cities like Vancouver, Chicago, and New York all have ground level train storage facilities that successfully integrate into residential areas while meeting the needs of their transit networks.

Source: Email from Scott Money, Metrolinx Media Relations, March 19, 2021

 

This passage just reinforces my disdain for this organization. It is so full of marketing wank, obfuscation and boosterism as to make a trader blush.

 

Dan

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, smallspy said:

This passage just reinforces my disdain for this organization. It is so full of marketing wank, obfuscation and boosterism as to make a trader blush.

 

Dan

what part of it is untrue though? Isnt it already canon fact that tunnelling is exponentially more expensive than above ground works? As PR you need to say in a way that is logical and postive to readers, but nothing is factually false here

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Ber said:

what part of it is untrue though? Isnt it already canon fact that tunnelling is exponentially more expensive than above ground works? As PR you need to say in a way that is logical and postive to readers, but nothing is factually false here

That whole passage could be easily summed into a single sentence - maybe two - and still be completely true and accurate. In fact, the paragraph written in red is not only the crux of their whole argument, but frankly the only one that actually contains any real information as to why their decision was made.

 

That last paragraph is particular galling as the reason that they are giving for making the station and yard above ground is because all of our other yards are already above ground(!). As if "all of our others are all that way!!1!" really makes for a valid reason to do anything.

 

A lot of their stuff is written like the staff is paid by the word, and that we are all toddlers needing to have our information spoon-fed to us. I have no problem with a decision being made, even if I don't agree with it. But don't think that I (or anyone else reading it) is a fucking idiot and doesn't know that it's because of money that they're making it.

 

Dan

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, smallspy said:

That whole passage could be easily summed into a single sentence - maybe two - and still be completely true and accurate. In fact, the paragraph written in red is not only the crux of their whole argument, but frankly the only one that actually contains any real information as to why their decision was made.

 

That last paragraph is particular galling as the reason that they are giving for making the station and yard above ground is because all of our other yards are already above ground(!). As if "all of our others are all that way!!1!" really makes for a valid reason to do anything.

 

A lot of their stuff is written like the staff is paid by the word, and that we are all toddlers needing to have our information spoon-fed to us. I have no problem with a decision being made, even if I don't agree with it. But don't think that I (or anyone else reading it) is a fucking idiot and doesn't know that it's because of money that they're making it.

 

Dan

So its the semantics of writing prose that you are riled about? Honestly I think it will in your best interest to not get so worked up over such trivial matters. So what if theres more sentences than you would like. Your time and energy would be better suited over more productive things.

In an ideal world yes, we can have plenty of subterranean storage facilities, but it makes much logical sense why most systems do not have it. As mentioned in the red para, it would cost exponentially more time and money to do this, not to mention the right soil conditions. Besides, whats the point in having and underground yard when the terminus station right next to it is above ground?

One thing you need to remember is that this presentation is NOT for transit fanatics like you or other armchair experts in this forum or urban toronto. They are for common people as well as stakeholders who need more simple guided descriptions as they are not technically as well versed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/9/2021 at 10:10 AM, Ber said:

So its the semantics of writing prose that you are riled about? Honestly I think it will in your best interest to not get so worked up over such trivial matters. So what if theres more sentences than you would like. Your time and energy would be better suited over more productive things.

In an ideal world yes, we can have plenty of subterranean storage facilities, but it makes much logical sense why most systems do not have it. As mentioned in the red para, it would cost exponentially more time and money to do this, not to mention the right soil conditions. Besides, whats the point in having and underground yard when the terminus station right next to it is above ground?

One thing you need to remember is that this presentation is NOT for transit fanatics like you or other armchair experts in this forum or urban toronto. They are for common people as well as stakeholders who need more simple guided descriptions as they are not technically as well versed.

First off.....I think that it's amusing that you think that I'm "riled up" about this.

 

Second off.....I enjoy your attempt to brush off criticism - without any attempt to rebut against the criticisms themselves - by using the same sort of language and attitude that Metrolinx displays. If you think that I am the only one making these same criticisms than you are sorely mistaken. There are a lot of people in the various industries that engage with Metrolinx on a regular basis that have the same concerns. There are people who work for Metrolinx that have the same concerns.

 

You can think of me as a "armchair expert" if you like. I really don't care much of your opinion to be frank - you've never given me much of a reason to pay much attention to what you post. The people that I work with day-to-day, and interact with regularly seem to have a slightly better opinion than that, and share a lot of the same concerns that I do. But, you know, apparently we're just fanatics according some random on a forum....

 

Going back to the whole crux of the argument - which you seem to have missed - is that Metrolinx purposely employs that kind of language in order to give the appearance of transparency. The organization is anything but. They regularly bully people around, expect the general public to be thankful for whatever decisions they've made, regardless of what effects those decisions will actually have on the populace. They employ bombastic language like what we saw above to give the appearance of making a change for the greater good when it's all just a smoke screen for a decision made on a single point (as valid as it may be). They do their best to hide the negatives until they are too late, in which case they regularly tie themselves up in verbal knots to try and spin it as a positive. And hey, if that's what you want in government agency, bully for you.

 

Me though? I'd rather see an organization that's more honest and forthcoming. Don't give us the spin - give us the truth. Give us the good and bad about each decision. We're grown ups, we can understand these things.

 

But what do I know. I'm just an "armchair expert"....

 

Dan

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, smallspy said:

First off.....I think that it's amusing that you think that I'm "riled up" about this.

 

Second off.....I enjoy your attempt to brush off criticism - without any attempt to rebut against the criticisms themselves - by using the same sort of language and attitude that Metrolinx displays. If you think that I am the only one making these same criticisms than you are sorely mistaken. There are a lot of people in the various industries that engage with Metrolinx on a regular basis that have the same concerns. There are people who work for Metrolinx that have the same concerns.

 

You can think of me as a "armchair expert" if you like. I really don't care much of your opinion to be frank - you've never given me much of a reason to pay much attention to what you post. The people that I work with day-to-day, and interact with regularly seem to have a slightly better opinion than that, and share a lot of the same concerns that I do. But, you know, apparently we're just fanatics according some random on a forum....

 

Going back to the whole crux of the argument - which you seem to have missed - is that Metrolinx purposely employs that kind of language in order to give the appearance of transparency. The organization is anything but. They regularly bully people around, expect the general public to be thankful for whatever decisions they've made, regardless of what effects those decisions will actually have on the populace. They employ bombastic language like what we saw above to give the appearance of making a change for the greater good when it's all just a smoke screen for a decision made on a single point (as valid as it may be). They do their best to hide the negatives until they are too late, in which case they regularly tie themselves up in verbal knots to try and spin it as a positive. And hey, if that's what you want in government agency, bully for you.

 

Me though? I'd rather see an organization that's more honest and forthcoming. Don't give us the spin - give us the truth. Give us the good and bad about each decision. We're grown ups, we can understand these things.

 

But what do I know. I'm just an "armchair expert"....

 

Dan

I am by no means being apolegetic to them, but by no means are they useless. Depsite their faults they still have managed to pull together the majority of the GTHA to integrtate their transit systems. Where will we be without them? Idd bet TTC will still be trying to power trip alone with their ancient tokens and we would have no common fare media like presto.

On another note, ive seen the quality of your posts throughout the years here and on UT. While I do acknowledge that you are very well versed in the technical and political aspects of this realm Im sure Im not alone in saying that you need to work on your tact when rebutting. Basically more times than not youre acting like a pompous know-it-all dick.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ber said:

Depsite their faults they still have managed to pull together the majority of the GTHA to integrtate their transit systems. Where will we be without them? Idd bet TTC will still be trying to power trip alone with their ancient tokens and we would have no common fare media like presto.

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Metrolinx essentially man-handle transit authorities into using Presto?

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, AnalogPentium said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Metrolinx essentially man-handle transit authorities into using Presto?

Yes - they held the TTC hostage by threatening to withhold a couple hundred millions of dollars in provincial funding if they did not agree to adopt Presto.

(Upon further research, it looks like adoption of Presto on the TTC was part of the Memorandum of Understanding that got the construction/funding of the LRT network)

I also wouldn't consider only having a common fare card to be "integrating" all the local transit systems. Especially considering every system has retained their existing fare structure, without any co-fare agreements (other than what was already in place before Presto).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Coming soon, purchasing a one ride ticket via the Transit app.

YRT Pay app is still available currently. Not sure if they plan on discontinuing their mobile app in favour of utilizing Transit app which has a bigger install base (I know I use it when in Toronto). Especially when some people like myself prefer not to come up with $4.25 in coins or those that simply just pay with a $5 bill. Of course no change is provided for overpayments. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/11/2021 at 10:59 AM, Articulated said:

Yes - they held the TTC hostage by threatening to withhold a couple hundred millions of dollars in provincial funding if they did not agree to adopt Presto.

(Upon further research, it looks like adoption of Presto on the TTC was part of the Memorandum of Understanding that got the construction/funding of the LRT network)

I also wouldn't consider only having a common fare card to be "integrating" all the local transit systems. Especially considering every system has retained their existing fare structure, without any co-fare agreements (other than what was already in place before Presto).

IMO sometimes it takes a more aggressive approach to get things going. You cant always play the nice guy or else they would take advantage of it. Its a selfish industry here where everyone is looking to their own interests. I doubt we would have any sort of integrated fare structure in the GTA or a common pay system without Presto. Given the track record, everyone will still be wasting millions on their own proprietary system that probably would have the same bugs and complaints as Presto. Years would be lost on endless studies and pilots. TTC would still be using their ancient tokens and never grow up. Love it or hate it, at least ML called the shots for everyone to follow, just like a party whip.

One positive aspect is that the bulk of development of presto was part of ML's scope, leaving everyone else to save their resources for other projects. They just paid for the final installation and upkeep of the product

Link to post
Share on other sites

May 3rd service changes have been posted:

Viva Blue changes:

Weekday first departure will be 3:54 AM from Richmond Hill Centre instead of 16th/Carville at 3:59 AM (no schedule change which the timing is still the same). Newmarket is 4:49 AM towards Finch Go Station.

Saturday: First departure from Newmarket is 6 AM with the final trip from Finch Go Station at 12:39 AM. Early and late evening frequency to be 18 minutes.

Sunday: Northbound from Finch Go Station is 6:12 AM until 12:55 AM the next day. Final departure from Newmarket is 12:15 AM. Early morning frequency to be approximately every 19 minutes and late evening every 20 minutes.

Viva Orange: Schedule adjustments 

Route 98, 99 and 98/99 (late evening): Frequency adjustments along with first/last departures changes.

Weekdays (98, 98/99 late evening):

Route 98 first departure is 5:06 AM until 8:45 PM from Yonge/Green Lane. Last departure is 8:02 PM from Bernard with frequency of every 47 to 48 minutes during the entire service day. 

Route 98/99 (late evening) first departure is 9:45 AM to 1:59 AM from Yonge/Green Lane. Northbound from Finch is 8:43 PM until 2:43 AM.

Saturday (98, 98/99 late evening):

Route 98 first departure is 5:15 AM until 8:41 PM from Yonge/Green Lane. Last departure from Bernard is 8:42 PM. Frequency is approximately every 45 to 49 minutes depending on time of day.

Route 98/99 (late evening) first departure from Yonge/Green Lane is 9:40 PM until 1:36 AM. Northbound from Finch is 8:36 PM until 2:49 AM. 

Sunday (98, 98/99 late evening):

Route 98 first departure is 6:56 AM until 9:35 PM from Yonge/Green Lane. Last departure from Bernard is 8:54 PM.

Route 105 Dufferin: First departure at 5:37 AM and last departure is 12:10 AM from Sheppard West Station along with schedule adjustments.

Mobility on Request Bristol, Gorham-Eagle and Newmarket Local will be able to book trips via mobile app instead of having to phone in an hour in advance to request service. Especially when it can be challenging if having to wait an hour and there are multiple requests in-progress to accommodate. 

School route connections: Select conventional routes that provide special school trips to be converted to 400 series routes to better accommodate. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...