Toronto Spadina Subway Extension Emergency Exits | ?m | 1s | TTC | IBI Group

[sixrings]

The thing is that Vaughan has a plan which is as wide as it is long. Basically a giant square grid. Richmond Hill will basically be another north York centre surrounding one street.

 

[44 North]

What is your problem with Metrolinx? Who told you the city's priority is the relief line. The city is 100% behind SmartTrack. All the available funding is going towards SmartTrack. Look how much the Federal parties were dying to contribute to SmartTrack during the election. I'm sure they were told by the city that's the priority. The city's main priority is not the DRL. All those consultations are just to kept it on the radar a bit. They are doubling down on SmartTrack. Everything else is being pushed to the backburner. At least the province acknowledged the Relief Line in the budget. How much money is Toronto willing to contribute for the DRL. I mean they are willing to fund SmartTrack but we don't hear anything about the relief line. I wonder why you don't criticize them but are so adamant to blame Metrolinx/Ontario.

The City is still studying the RL afaik. It's still a priority. And we still maintain all of our Relief Line criteria. The Prov hasn't acknowledged or adopted this, and is undertaking an entirely separate relief study. Subways in Vaughan? Sure! Subways in Markham? Done deal. Subways on Eglinton East? Why not? Subways in Scarborough? Couldn't hurt. Subways in downtown TO? Whoa, whoa. Hold your horses. How about buses and an upgraded 504 instead?

It was only recently that the Relief Line got bumped up in the Prov's "Big Move". Before that they were under the impression extending Yonge to Hwy 7 by 2015 would pose no capacity problem. Am I absolving the Miller/Giambrone administration for wanting to use $12bn on non-DRL projects and have the line start construction in 2019? No. But even when they got the ball rolling on an overdue DRL study the Prov didn't seem interested, and ditto for when TC was dead in the Ford administration. And now looking at the recent YRNS, it seems they're still not all that interested. So yes, the City is studying RER/ST now. But we're also still studying SSE and the RL (an actual well-thought RL - unlike what Metrolinx is shortlisting).

I don't want to express my harebrained theories about ST, greenfield development, or political influence. But I see a lot of ST as being big money and higher level politics using Tory and Toronto's political system to move up in rank a couple more vote-winning projects. In this case: RER to Downtown Markham (which aside from Thornhill and almost Richmond Hill, is the only Fed PC riding in the GTA), and a Crosstown West extn to 'Sauga. I still have trouble wrapping my head around ST, or why Toronto is studying it instead of the Prov. But I think it's too early for me to agree it's our #1 priority, or that the RL is dead/backburnered. Regardless, ST and the RL can coexist. And if Tory suddenly dropped support for ST, I considerably doubt the Prov would revert from its current position and support Toronto's idea of a relief line.

 

[44 North]

When the Bloor-Danforth subway was extended west from Keele (now Line 2) in the 1960's, there were protests (now called NIMBYs) against high-rise buildings going up around the new High Park Subway Station.

There were protests against development almost everywhere we sent subways. But one thing to keep in mind about Bloor/Danforth at the time is that many of those homes were (and oftentimes still are) rooming houses, duplexes, triplexes - with each apartment holding an entire family. On top of that the lots were very narrow, and the main street was lined with shops and pedestrians. Naturally many homes are reverting to single family now, with one or zero kids. But long and short it wasn't always like that. And even in 2015 the densities along Bloor/Danforth are still quite high - relatively speaking.

 

[BMO]

Vaughan is not gonna catch up to Canada's 6th largest city, and they are competing with Markham Centre, Richmond Hill Centre, and Langstaff Gateway (all of which are more grandiose than realistic)...

Please pick a side and stick to it. Because I know you'll be back in the Yonge-Extension thread saying how the subway shouldn't be built yet you're using Richmond Hill Centre (which is planned based on the required subway extension as an example of a centre that is much more likely to succeed...Seems kind of counter-intuitive to use it as an example since you're so prominent at saying it shouldn't and won't be built thus making your argument about VCC completely moot.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Im sure people were saying that about Toronto back when it looked like this:

Source: City of Toronto

There were no office towers back then. They came later, on over a long period of time. Vaughan's City Centre will be more someday. It's inevitable. Maybe not in the next 30 years, but it will happen.

Are you seriously bringing up a photo from more than a hundred years ago?

It should be blatantly obvious that all discussion in this thread is about development in the reasonably near future.

Sure, VMC is likely to be successful in the very, very long term. But I wouldn't expect their vision to be achieved in 30 years or less.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

The City is still studying the RL afaik. It's still a priority. And we still maintain all of our Relief Line criteria.

Depends what you mean by "The city." Do you mean council? TTC? The planning department? I suspect Keesmaat would slot the DRL way ahead of ST, but if council is doing the opposite (and they are!) , what import is that?

It was only recently that the Relief Line got bumped up in the Prov's "Big Move".

Erm, The Big Move came out in 2008 and I believe that adjustment happened in 2012. That's not recently. That's also the shifting priorities of 3 Toronto councils.

Before that they were under the impression extending Yonge to Hwy 7 by 2015 would pose no capacity problem. Am I absolving the Miller/Giambrone administration for wanting to use $12bn on non-DRL projects and have the line start construction in 2019? No. But even when they got the ball rolling on an overdue DRL study the Prov didn't seem interested, and ditto for when TC was dead in the Ford administration.

This is such a convoluted sidetrack. Who is THEY?
When Toronto asked Metrolinx to prioritize Transit City, they placed it at the heart of the Big Move. When they asked them to move up the DRL, they did. When they ditched TC, Metrolinx rolled its eyes and did that too. I'd argue that Metrolinx should take ALL these decisions out of Toronto's incompetent hands, but the fact remains that at every stage Metrolinx has gone along with Toronto's totally unstable concept of priorities. Vaughan and York Region have been entirely consistent during this time (yes, even while opening new whitebelt lands).

I don't want to express my harebrained theories about ST, greenfield development, or political influence. But I see a lot of ST as being big money and higher level politics using Tory and Toronto's political system to move up in rank a couple more vote-winning projects. In this case: RER to Downtown Markham (which aside from Thornhill and almost Richmond Hill, is the only Fed PC riding in the GTA),

you just said you weren't going to express hair-brained theories!!
RER to downtown Markham was on the books BEFORE Tory and his cabal drew up SmartTrack on the back of a napkin. It's a key growth centre - it's the very model of what the province is trying to do, which is part of the reason they're also sticking a university campus there. I'm as cynical as anyone about developers and politics but I don't buy this at all.
What do federal ridings even have to do with an issue that has been almost entirely provincial?

I'll tell you what SmartTrack is really about: Tory taking an idea Metrolinx already had pretty much figuring it out, grabbing the ball at the 1 yard-line, taking it into the end zone and claiming he just engineered a touchdown drive. The reality is a bit more convoluted than that but I think 905 development is the least of it. None of this has anything do with Vaughan or the rest of this thread, of course.

I still have trouble wrapping my head around ST, or why Toronto is studying it instead of the Prov. But I think it's too early for me to agree it's our #1 priority, or that the RL is dead/backburnered. Regardless, ST and the RL can coexist. And if Tory suddenly dropped support for ST, I considerably doubt the Prov would revert from its current position and support Toronto's idea of a relief line.

Tory is never going to drop support for ST because it's his legacy project, even though it's piggybacking on, and making a mess of, someone else's project. Toronto isn't studying it as much as they're figuring out how to justify a redundant, optics-oriented project in the context of the work the province is already doing on RER (and in the context of their far more damaging and ad hoc Scarborough planning).

Sure, VMC is likely to be successful in the very, very long term. But I wouldn't expect their vision to be achieved in 30 years or less.

Sometimes I think people have very optimistic assumptions about how planning works. NY Centre is a largely successful intensification project and it's on Yonge Street, with a subway and it's about 30 years in now, and still not finished. Of course VMC will take longer but something doesn't have to be complete to be successful. If condos are going on under-utilized lands in Vaughan and more people are taking transit and fewer living out on the fringe and driving, it's doing what it was supposed to. The rest is just a big, subjective consideration of degree.

 

[salsa]

Please pick a side and stick to it. Because I know you'll be back in the Yonge-Extension thread saying how the subway shouldn't be built yet you're using Richmond Hill Centre (which is planned based on the required subway extension as an example of a centre that is much more likely to succeed...Seems kind of counter-intuitive to use it as an example since you're so prominent at saying it shouldn't and won't be built thus making your argument about VCC completely moot.

What are you talking about? I don't oppose the Yonge subway extension.

 

[44 North]

Depends what you mean by "The city." Do you mean council? TTC? The planning department? I suspect Keesmaat would slot the DRL way ahead of ST, but if council is doing the opposite (and they are!) , what import is that?

I meant what I wrote: The City. With City capitalized, not lowercase. And ST (in whatever concept it is) can coexist with DRL. As well, we're well aware by now that mayor's can't rule by fiat and can easily lose support for their pet projects - whether it be Sheppard or SmartTrack.

Erm, The Big Move came out in 2008 and I believe that adjustment happened in 2012. That's not recently. That's also the shifting priorities of 3 Toronto councils.

Subjective. I think less than three years is fairly recent. And there are two Relief Studies: the City's, and the Prov's. We still don't know which one was bumped up. But considering it's the Prov's Big Move, I'd say it's the latter.

This is such a convoluted sidetrack. Who is THEY?
When Toronto asked Metrolinx to prioritize Transit City, they placed it at the heart of the Big Move. When they asked them to move up the DRL, they did. When they ditched TC, Metrolinx rolled its eyes and did that too. I'd argue that Metrolinx should take ALL these decisions out of Toronto's incompetent hands, but the fact remains that at every stage Metrolinx has gone along with Toronto's totally unstable concept of priorities. Vaughan and York Region have been entirely consistent during this time (yes, even while opening new whitebelt lands).

The Big Move has changed drastically, and I'm not talking about the dropping of TC. For one Metrolinx has now acknowledged RER on a realigned RH corridor - which didn't exist before the summer. And sure as hell didn't exist in the Yonge North modelling. They're also now proposing tram-trains to run on Front Street and subways running through floodplains (both of which are fairly 'unstable concepts'). After reading the last YRNS report I sure as hell wouldn't want Metrolinx taking anything out of Toronto's hands.

you just said you weren't going to express hair-brained theories!!
RER to downtown Markham was on the books BEFORE Tory and his cabal drew up SmartTrack on the back of a napkin. It's a key growth centre - it's the very model of what the province is trying to do, which is part of the reason they're also sticking a university campus there. I'm as cynical as anyone about developers and politics but I don't buy this at all.
What do federal ridings even have to do with an issue that has been almost entirely provincial?

Never said it wasn't on the books, but Stouffville RER was further down the line than it seems to be now. And my pointing out the Federal results was meant to show that it's a decisive area at both levels. Ditto for Thornhill and Richmond Hill. In the last ten years both of those areas have moved up in rank for heavy public investment, while other less decisive areas have seen considerable downgrades in investment or have been dropped entirely. Naturally it's hard to prove politics plays a role in costly make/break decisions, but I think its part is somewhat pervasive.

 

[sixrings]

Are you seriously bringing up a photo from more than a hundred years ago?

It should be blatantly obvious that all discussion in this thread is about development in the reasonably near future.

Sure, VMC is likely to be successful in the very, very long term. But I wouldn't expect their vision to be achieved in 30 years or less.

heres my thing we have only had a condo boom in the last 15 years and really a hyper boom in the last 5. The reality is before this people wanted suburban houses and the land was available to grant them that wish. However peoples preferences have changed and they are requesting more urban neighbourhoods and condos. I rememeber when apartments were viewed as for poor people and apartments are a dirty word. Now the word condo is chic. Anyways with the added incentive that there is really little land left to develop this all works towards these city centres growing much faster than they have in the past. Unless a massive bubble happens there is no reason to think that this cant happen in 30 years.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

I am all for RER along some kind of ST-like alignment - but fundamentally, if that's what the province is doing, why is the City a) dipping their hands into what they don't have any expertise in, and arguably something that's fundamentally a better fit with thee competencies of Mlinx; and b) why is it not committing to resolving an issue - i.e. Yonge Line overcrowding, hoping and praying that something like ST will resolve it when the preliminary analysis has already shown it won't?

The folly of drawing a line on a map, committing to it and then trying to figure out what it is good for and whether it can even be done is in fully display - and John Tory got to own this one, it's entirely of his own doing.

AoD

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Salsa - I think BMO thought you were 44 North. Sometimes it's hard keeping everyone's silly fake names straight

I meant what I wrote: The City. With City capitalized, not lowercase. And ST (in whatever concept it is) can coexist with DRL.

On the latter point, I never said otherwise. But council has not given staff consistent direction for a long enough time to advance something. Clearly ST is ahead of DRL right now but of course they can both be done, in theory, in the fullness of time.

The Big Move has changed drastically, and I'm not talking about the dropping of TC. For one Metrolinx has now acknowledged RER on a realigned RH corridor - which didn't exist before the summer. And sure as hell didn't exist in the Yonge North modelling.

I've talked with people at Metrolinx and in case it's unclear from what they've already said, RH is probably the most long-term of the RER projects for all the reasons everyone here already knows. But the real macro issue is that someone (let's say a regional transit agency?) should be looking at ST, Scarborough and RER from a network perspective and figuring the pros and cons and ensuring that what is built serves people and serves the network and doesn't duplicate service etc.

It seems crystal clear that the City (by which I mean the decisions of council) are NOT doing this. They're making ad hoc decisions and then trying to tie them together with duct tape. So, I guess we have different perspectives about who can be trusted to run the show here.

Never said it wasn't on the books, but Stouffville RER was further down the line than it seems to be now. And my pointing out the Federal results was meant to show that it's a decisive area at both levels. Ditto for Thornhill and Richmond Hill. In the last ten years both of those areas have moved up in rank for heavy public investment, while other less decisive areas have seen considerable downgrades in investment or have been dropped entirely. Naturally it's hard to prove politics plays a role in costly make/break decisions, but I think its part is somewhat pervasive.

That's all a bit muddled...obviously politics plays a role in costly decisions, especially infrastructure investment. It also seems obvious to me is that inner suburbs (not just RH and TH but also NY and Scarb etc.) are where some of the biggest investment is needed - all you have to do is look at the famous Hulchanski report. I think the federal results are still pretty meaningless; if they weren't TH residents wouldn't have voted for the guy least likely to build a subway in the riding.

heres my thing we have only had a condo boom in the last 15 years and really a hyper boom in the last 5. The reality is before this people wanted suburban houses and the land was available to grant them that wish. However peoples preferences have changed and they are requesting more urban neighbourhoods and condos. I rememeber when apartments were viewed as for poor people and apartments are a dirty word.

All this. I don't know if you have to work in the field to see it. Maybe average people just get bored reading Richard Florida articles about "Millenials" and "The sharing economy" and all that but it's a consistent and persistent trend that younger people are opting for very different living styles than the ones that drove auto-oriented suburban expansion. We should be happy our government has established, if only at a policy level so far, the framework for facilitating all this. Making it a reality is hardly a gimme but I think people who instantly dismiss a place like VMC are really missing the forest for the trees.

 

[BMO]

The same was said about Scarborough. As I said, I would like to be proven wrong but just because there's a plan doesn't mean it will ultimately be successful.

What are you talking about? I don't oppose the Yonge subway extension.

I thought you were 44 North. My apologies.

 

[44 North]

On the latter point, I never said otherwise. But council has not given staff consistent direction for a long enough time to advance something. Clearly ST is ahead of DRL right now but of course they can both be done, in theory, in the fullness of time.

In terms of planning, ST is not 'clearly ahead of the DRL'.

I've talked with people at Metrolinx and in case it's unclear from what they've already said, RH is probably the most long-term of the RER projects for all the reasons everyone here already knows. But the real macro issue is that someone (let's say a regional transit agency?) should be looking at ST, Scarborough and RER from a network perspective and figuring the pros and cons and ensuring that what is built serves people and serves the network and doesn't duplicate service etc.

It seems crystal clear that the City (by which I mean the decisions of council) are NOT doing this. They're making ad hoc decisions and then trying to tie them together with duct tape. So, I guess we have different perspectives about who can be trusted to run the show here.

The takeaway is that a realignment has only recently been acknowledged in any report - which emphasizes my point about non-Toronto aspects of the Big Move seeing big changes. Again, this summer has been the first time since the 80s where an RH reroute has been genuinely recognized. So clearly it's not just TO that are the ones with changing priorities.

As for you not trusting Toronto, obviously that works both ways. But I think many can agree that when the regional transportation authority tells us we can run tram-trains along Front St (which goes against the City's mandate of actually fixing surface transportation downtown), or that we can bypass 50k people in the downtown east shoulder and run subways in a floodplain next to the volatile Lower Don (which doesn't work and is as "ad hoc" as it gets) - we should question their trustworthiness. FYI: those are shortlisted relief ideas (we're well past the long list stage).

That's all a bit muddled...obviously politics plays a role in costly decisions, especially infrastructure investment. It also seems obvious to me is that inner suburbs (not just RH and TH but also NY and Scarb etc.) are where some of the biggest investment is needed - all you have to do is look at the famous Hulchanski report. I think the federal results are still pretty meaningless; if they weren't TH residents wouldn't have voted for the guy least likely to build a subway in the riding.

It was muddled, apologies. But my overall point was to show that our priorities are like moving targets - with seemingly politically-expedient targets moving up in rank and others down. Example: RER was promised on Lake Shore E/W 40yrs ago, yet now we're seeing RER promised for the Stouffville line. I'm not saying Stouffville isn't important, but IMO the Prov should finally finish Lake Shore E/W (and many other unmet promises) before tackling the second least-used GO line.

Another example is waterfront transit in TO. We have bureaucrats, planners, developers, and politicians (even anti-streetcar Rob Ford) who've all made public appeals for higher level funding for waterfront transit. Nobody came. Whereas when one appeal from one politician is made to fund a seldom-used GO line to Downtown Markham, and a low ridership Crosstown West extn to 'Sauga - $Billions are offered within hours. I can't prove it, but I'd imagine that if TO's waterfront ridings were likely to vote non-Liberal the story would be different.

All this. I don't know if you have to work in the field to see it. Maybe average people just get bored reading Richard Florida articles about "Millenials" and "The sharing economy" and all that but it's a consistent and persistent trend that younger people are opting for very different living styles than the ones that drove auto-oriented suburban expansion. We should be happy our government has established, if only at a policy level so far, the framework for facilitating all this. Making it a reality is hardly a gimme but I think people who instantly dismiss a place like VMC are really missing the forest for the trees.

I for one am not instantly dismissing VMC. There's a mountain of evidence that shows it will not live up to its promises. One: it lacks many of the ingredients that make a successful "Centre". Two: it shares many of the drawbacks of unsuccessful Centres. Three: it's hands-down the lowest density centre in the Greater Golden Horseshoe. And four: Vaughan has a pro-sprawl city council that has thumbed their noses at P2G and Greenbelt legislation. Many are aware of these issues by now and are not simply being Douglas and Debbie Downers.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

In terms of planning, ST is not 'clearly ahead of the DRL'.

Not in terms of actual planning; in terms of project prioritization. Just ask the mayor which is ahead.

Another example is waterfront transit in TO. We have bureaucrats, planners, developers, and politicians (even anti-streetcar Rob Ford) who've all made public appeals for higher level funding for waterfront transit. Nobody came. Whereas when one appeal from one politician is made to fund a seldom-used GO line to Downtown Markham, and a low ridership Crosstown West extn to 'Sauga - $Billions are offered within hours. I can't prove it, but I'd imagine that if TO's waterfront ridings were likely to vote non-Liberal the story would be different.

I'd be shocked/surprised if Tory knew or cared he'd be "helping" Downtown Markham. Really, the bigger issue is the huge fuzziness around Smart Track vs. RER and the idea that Smart Track (if it's even different) may have bumped up the RER on that line. It was just a question of when, not if, and the York U campus shows the province was going all in there already.

There's a mountain of evidence that shows it will not live up to its promises. One: it lacks many of the ingredients that make a successful "Centre". Two: it shares many of the drawbacks of unsuccessful Centres. Three: it's hands-down the lowest density centre in the Greater Golden Horseshoe. And four: Vaughan has a pro-sprawl city council that has thumbed their noses at P2G and Greenbelt legislation. Many are aware of these issues by now and are not simply being Douglas and Debbie Downers.

Props for the Tory quote at the end. I'm not going to ask you to list the things you think it lacks etc. I will say that looking at its density is absolutely absurd. Everyone knows it's a greenfield site. So were Markham Centre and Cornell for that matter, in 1990. A lot changes in 25 years and neither of those have a subway station in the middle of em.

The council, yeah, they suck but it's an exaggeration to say they've thumbed their noses. They still have to intensify there and if they don't want to, they'll just lose OMB case after OMB case once the development applications for VMC start rolling in. Whatever VMC has going against it (and there are some factors) it also has the force of Ontario's planning law, a subway, a BRT, only 2 landowners (at least one of which is all in on the vision) going for it. I'll take that over pretty much every other suburban growth centre, no matter what it's 2010 density is. Really, throwing out the present density totally misses the point of the growth plan (which, you know, is to create density).

 

[44 North]

Not in terms of actual planning; in terms of project prioritization. Just ask the mayor which is ahead.

I'm sure Tory would say the usual: a lot but at the same time very little. But he'd probably end it all by continuing to be adamant that the RL is still a go - just as he's done in the past when asked similar Qs.

I'd be shocked/surprised if Tory knew or cared he'd be "helping" Downtown Markham. Really, the bigger issue is the huge fuzziness around Smart Track vs. RER and the idea that Smart Track (if it's even different) may have bumped up the RER on that line. It was just a question of when, not if, and the York U campus shows the province was going all in there already.

Tory could've easily proposed for ST to run from Sheppard in the east to Renforth or Pearson in the west. He didn't, and there's probably a pretty good reason for that. And want to take a guess where else has a new campus equal in size to what's proposed in Downtown Markham? Toronto's waterfront. All it's served by is a shitty bus, and there's been across-the-board pleas for a transit funding commitment. Makes one wonder why the Prov hasn't gone "all in" as they've done so easily elsewhere.

The council, yeah, they suck but it's an exaggeration to say they've thumbed their noses. They still have to intensify there and if they don't want to, they'll just lose OMB case after OMB case once the development applications for VMC start rolling in. Whatever VMC has going against it (and there are some factors) it also has the force of Ontario's planning law, a subway, a BRT, only 2 landowners (at least one of which is all in on the vision) going for it. I'll take that over pretty much every other suburban growth centre, no matter what it's 2010 density is. Really, throwing out the present density totally misses the point of the growth plan (which, you know, is to create density).

But it's not an exaggeration to say Vaughan has been thumbing their noses at P2G and Greenbelt. There's evidence of this. Plus, York Region has warned them to quickly make room for more swaths of single family homes in their north end - which they've agreed with. In other words, they're tenaciously going full steam down the same path as before P2G came in. And since it's unlikely they're planning on exceeding their overall 2031 municipal growth expectations, it's a reasonable deduction to conclude that this outward growth will come out of higher density growth in VMC.