News   Nov 22, 2024
National Housing Day: City of Toronto and Riverdale Co-op Open Affordable Homes
 471     1 
News   Nov 22, 2024
Bauhaus Condos Rising in Toronto's Old Town
 925     4 
News   Nov 22, 2024
49-Storey Waterfront Tower Proposed at Spadina and Queens Quay
 2.3K     6 

Metrolinx: Other Items (catch all)

Not sure where I could put this; and mods can move this to the correct thread if it does not belong here. I decided to put two different materials that Markham forwarded to Metrolinx:

Proposed GO Station on the Richmond Hill GO Line at John Street and Green Line - Markham Inquiry​

First off, I do not know if this was mentioned before, but there is a proposed GO Station on the Richmond Hill GO Line at John Street and Green Lane. Recently, Markham has had several large developments proposals in the area recently, and Markham wants to hear more from Metrolinx about their plans for the station. You can read below for more information or at this link. https://pub-markham.escribemeetings...a=Agenda&lang=English&Item=33&Tab=attachments

  • Whereas the Green Lane/John Street/Bayview Avenue area of Thornhill is and has been in transition for several years and contains a wide range of low-density employment lands; and,
    Whereas there is the possibility that with a comprehensive and sophisticated level of urban planning, all stakeholders could see their land use priorities realized to their satisfaction; and,
    Whereas significant traffic volumes are a concern with new development applications like Tridel (167 units) on the eastern edge of the Ladies Golf Course, Liberty Development proposed (1,287 units) development on the Shouldice lands and Timbercreek proposed (579 units) redevelopment of the Thornhill Square Shopping Centre lands; and,
    Whereas significant amounts of land needed by GO Transit for traditional park and ride solutions are unavailable and/or not viable due to the high price of land at TOC GO Stations; and,
    Whereas medium and high-density condos and office development will be in and around the TOC GO Station, minimal or no parking will be available at the station and mobility solutions will be walking, cycling and autonomous (minibus) vehicles to get around the “Village of Green Lane” community and GO Station; and,
    Whereas YRT buses coming from the east will drop transit riders off at Green Lane / John Street GO Station and the potential Yonge Subway Stations at Royal Orchard Blvd. and/or Clark Avenue; and,
    Whereas merging different modes of transit into one service to suit the mobility needs of individual customers is now an established business model, known as mobility-as-a-service (MaaS); and,
    Whereas in the future, autonomous vehicles will have a role as an F/L/O mile option. People switch if they experience transit as fast, convenient, and affordable. People do not typically switch to sustainable modes of transport for their green credentials. They switch if the overall experience is fast and convenient. F/L/O mile options led to more sustainable mobility if they make the public transit experience as good as or better than that of using a car; and,
    Whereas community planners need to be thinking about autonomous vehicle (like the Olli minibus) solutions because of the significant impacts they will have on travel within the TOC and to and from the GO transit station; and,
    Whereas autonomous (minibus) vehicles would provide the F/L/O mile connectivity to transit users, increasing mobility options for people within a ¾ mile radius of the station and will greatly benefit the disabled, seniors, and children too; and,
    Whereas construction of the Yonge North Subway Extension (YNSE) is scheduled to start 2022-23 near the Langstaff GO Transit Station; and,
    Whereas Metrolinx in the latter part of 2021 or 2022, is planning to study the Richmond Hill GO Transit Line and prepare an initial Business Case; and,
    Whereas the Richmond Hill GO Transit line, may have the potential to add several new TOC GO Station stops including Bloomington, Gormley, Elgin Mills Road, Major Mackenzie Road, 16th Ave, High-Tech Road, Green Lane/John Street, Steeles Ave, Finch Ave, York Mills, Eglinton Ave, Bloor Street, Queen Street and Corktown (Distillery District) in the future; and,
    Whereas all RH TOC GO Stations should be planned as complete, integrated destination stations. Before the pandemic, ridership was 10,500 passengers a day. Every station should be planned as destination TOC Stations with a ridership target for the RH GO line by 2051 of 300,000 passengers a day; and,
    Whereas these lands are in a very strategic location with frontage on Green Lane/John Street, and abutting two rail lines, one of which is the Richmond Hill GO Transit Line going from Richmond Hill to Union Station, as well as being contiguous to, or a short distance from low and medium density residential uses; and,
    Whereas this 65+ acres of employment lands at Green Lane and John Street is a strategic parcel for residential intensification infill, as well as for a significant increase in non-industrial employment opportunities for the residents of Markham; and,
    Whereas there are few locations of this size in the GTA available for both residential intensification and non-industrial employment opportunities, leading to the conclusion that these lands should be thoroughly studied with the intent of having a comprehensive Green Lane / John Street TOC Secondary Plan; and,
    Whereas with proper urban planning, it is extremely important that prior to any new development occurring a comprehensive local road and pathway network and land use plan be established; and,
    Whereas the Village of Green Lane goal is to be planned as a net-zero green community, with district energy, automatic waste collection, energy from waste, solar and geo-thermal solutions be investigated; and,
    Whereas it is in the interest of the city, local businesses, and residents to have this plan cover all the relevant lands and have an interactive planning process involving landowners, ratepayers, Metrolinx, I/O, MTO, YRT and professional world class TOC urban design and planning consultants; and,
    Now Therefore Be It Resolved:
    1. That staff be directed to report back on an estimated cost for the studies, timing, and potential financial resources; and,
    2. That Staff engage consultants determined by Staff to be necessary, such as urban design architects, TOC urban planners, transportation engineers, landscape architects and retail consultant to complete a secondary plan study for the lands shown on the attached Appendix A; and,
    3. That Staff investigate the feasibility of being part of the City of Toronto Transit Commission and Metrolinx automated vehicle trial at the Rouge Hill GO Station as it represents a key role in the establishment of complete destination rail transit integrated community station at Green Lane / John Street and other TOC rail stations in Markham and York Region.

      Screenshot (416).png
Click to expand...

Markham's Opinion on the The Alignment of the Yonge North Subway Extension​


This could very well be in the Yonge North Subway Extension Thread, but I will leave it here for now. I found it interesting that Markham does not want Option 3 for the line alignment, and wants either option 1 or 2:

Whereas, the Yonge North Subway Extension is a priority project in the Province of Ontario’s Transit Plan and is York Region’s Top Transit priority, and

Whereas, a capital cost funding commitment by the Federal government on May 11, 2021 means the project is now fully funded by all three levels of government, and

Whereas, the Environmental Assessment for a Yonge Street alignment for the 8-kilometre route from the Toronto Transit Commission’s Finch Subway Station to the end-of-the-line in the Langstaff Gateway/Richmond Hill Centre included extensive public consultation and was approved by the Province of Ontario in 2009, and

Whereas, Markham Council has endorsed York Region Rapid Transit Corporation’s Environmental Assessment that recommends a Yonge Street subway alignment, and

Whereas, of the three potential alignments explored by Metrolinx as outlined in their Initial Business Case confirms that Options 1 and 2, each with a Yonge Street alignment, provide greater benefits in terms of individual Vehicle Kilometres Travelled and the number of people who will use transit during morning rush hour in 2041 than Option 3, and

Whereas, there is statistically no difference among the three Options in terms of Benefit Cost Ratio and total Capital Costs as outlined in Metrolinx’s Initial Business Case and Supplementary Analysis which states Option 3 has “a more complex deliverability case”, and

Whereas, Markham Council endorsed a Yonge Street alignment for the subway at its May 28, 2019 meeting indicating “optimizing the Yonge Subway Extension alignment in its own established transportation corridor which is Yonge Street;”

Now Therefore Be It Resolved:

  1. That, Markham Council reject Metrolinx’s proposed Option 3 alignment for the Yonge North Subway Extension, and
  2. That Markham Council requests Metrolinx to pursue the Options 1 or 2 alignment for the Yonge North Subway Extension that adheres to Yonge Street, a major arterial road appropriate for intensification and economic development, and
  3. That any other alternative alignment for Options 1 and 2 considered by Metrolinx be kept on the Yonge Street corridor as much as possible to minimize any impacts to the existing community, and
  4. That once a final recommendation has been determined that all measures be considered including full compensation to any property owner impacted by any proposed alignment, and
  5. That Markham Council requests the Province of Ontario include subway stations for Thornhill at Clark Avenue and Royal Orchard Blvd. in the Yonge North Subway Extension capital project
Click to expand...
 
Are we listening to an organization that can write "Whereas this 65+ acres of employment lands at Green Lane and John Street is a strategic parcel for residential intensification infill..." ??
 
CapitalSeven said:
Are we listening to an organization that can write "Whereas this 65+ acres of employment lands at Green Lane and John Street is a strategic parcel for residential intensification infill..." ??
Click to expand...
I think the point of mentioning that is the fact that several plots of lands around these employment lands are going to be redeveloped as multiple 15+ storey towers, and that the 65 acres will become a high density neighborhood in the future. It's just simply stating that the development potential is large and it adds to the reasons that Markham supports a new GO Station there and should get one there as well.
 
The story below, from CBC, deals with 2 former Mx staff who were fired in the first few weeks of work for failing a background check by Toronto Police.

Both happen to be Black.

Neither has a criminal or an arrest record.

Toronto Police never gave a reason to Mx as to why these employees should be fired except that they 'failed' the background check.

They are now taking legal action to get their jobs back, recover lost wages, and get an order for Toronto Police to expunge any information held on them (after turning it over)

I have to say, I find their story quite compelling; and don't think it sounds at all reasonable to deny people employment and not provide them a reason or any due process by which they might challenge erroneous information or conclusions.

 
nfitz said:
Good grief - why do you need a police check for a dispatcher's job anyhow?
Click to expand...

The reason for this is that dispatchers have access to CPIC (the RCMP database)

Presumably, in case there is a security incident and the person's identity is known.

Or if Mx security detain someone.

I'd be curious to know how often the CPIC access is actually used, the stated reasons, and evidence of utility.

I'm not sure why that can't be managed through the police, who one might assume would be called to any detention, or serious security incident.
 
^An inflammatory statement with scant reasoning and questionable premise. Yeah, I'll pass. It's not the McCarthy era out there. It's high time for more nuance in these discussions and a greater burden of proof required for sensationalist claims. But hey, this was always Fitz's schtick before he was banned so it's peas against a wall, I suppose.
 
nfitz said:
I'm surprised to hear that.

I guess it's a tool that the police use to keep the force white.
Click to expand...

I must confess......I find this comment confusing.

The background check, which at first blush certainly seems to have been unfair in these cases, absent further info...........

Was applied to two Mx dispatchers, not to Toronto Police.

Racial prejudice may have played a role, I don't think the evidence is in on that yet; but certainly it had a racialized effect.

Regardless, are you suggesting police want to keep Mx dispatchers white? I'm a bit confused on that......

****

As to the Toronto Police themselves the force is 26% non-white.

I'm fairly certain more recent graduating classes have been well above that number, but couldn't find confirmatory data in a timely way.

I did note with interest, that last fall's graduating class of cadets for Toronto was 50% female, that is certainly a first.
 
Northern Light said:
Regardless, are you suggesting police want to keep Mx dispatchers white? I'm a bit confused on that......
Click to expand...
Good grief no - I doubt that they care. My point is that it's the same standard they use for all police checks - and likely dates from the days when the force was mostly white.

I'm surprised that anyone would be suggest there isn't systemic racism within the police.

Northern Light said:
As to the Toronto Police themselves the force is 26% non-white.
Click to expand...
Wow, I hadn't realised it was still that low - in a city that's about 50% non-white.

What are new cadets?
 
nfitz said:
Good grief no - I doubt that they care. My point is that it's the same standard they use for all police checks - and likely dates from the days when the force was mostly white.

I'm surprised that anyone would be suggest there isn't systemic racism within the police.
Click to expand...

I'm certainly not suggesting that.

Only that we don't yet have clear evidence that that played a role in this specific set of cases (though that's certainly quite possible); any which way, how this was handled looks poor.

nfitz said:
Wow, I hadn't realised it was still that low - in a city that's about 50% non-white.

What are new cadets?
Click to expand...

New hires.

Cadet is the term for a police college attendee.

Once hired they are a 'Recruit' for six months, then move to 4th class constable, as I understand it.

****

Found a reference here that the 2019 graduate hires were 36% visible minority:

Stories - Toronto Police Service

tpsnews.ca tpsnews.ca
 
Last edited:
Undead said:
^It's high time for more nuance in these discussions and a greater burden of proof required for sensationalist claims. But hey, this was always Fitz's schtick before he was banned so it's peas against a wall, I suppose.
Click to expand...
And yet we have the police using a standard of "just trust us, and stop asking questions".
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top