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

Edward Skira

http://skyrisecities.com
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
14,267
Reaction score
13,206
Location
Toronto
This will certainly increase usage at Pioneer Village and York University (to a lesser extent). From the Vaughan Secondary Plan

Screen Shot 2018-12-20 at Thursday Dec 20, 2018 9.08.44 AM.png
 

thettctransitfanatic

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 7, 2017
Messages
1,547
Reaction score
463
To be frank I think the TYSSE is more or less a project I am proud of, of course I think the priority that it was given over more important projects is ridiculous however that being said it has given us:
  1. Some Beautiful Standout Stations (York, DVP, VMC being my favourite)
  2. Some actually significant connections to York and VMC (which is growing rapidly and has a fantastic connection to Viva)
  3. A sense that this line (Spadina) is basically in its final state with no logical extensions after this
  4. A new connection to an all day GO service which actually has some tangible benefits beyond future proofing (people going to York U or Yorkdale can now transfer here)

  5. Another *high quality* GO station
  6. Some more ridership drivers on the underused Spadina Line

All of the points are great, and I agreed with you.
 

WislaHD

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 21, 2013
Messages
9,194
Reaction score
7,405
Location
Midtown Toronto
That all seems to be south of the railway tracks. I believe the discussion was about Highway 407 station. I expect the east side of Jane will always be a dead zone, but what about the lands around and to the west of the station.

Though even the area around the Exchange/Jane intersection would be walk able to the station, if development there allowed convenient access to Jane, and you could actually walk into the station from Jane street. It seems rather inaccessible from the north, with signs on the sidewalk to the station saying no pedestrians.

Would it have killed them to have simply put a sidewalk to an entrance where that big window is pointing towards Jane Street?

I got curious, so I mapped it out.

Developable Parcels at Hwy-407.png


The entire land is Parkway Belt West Lands (so ownership controlled by Infrastructure Ontario), but only the utility corridor is in use (the grey corridor outlined above), so ostensibly, the province through their Infrastructure Ontario arm could remove the Parkway Belt regulations from the lands identified as developable parcels, and sell them on the open market to developers.

TRCA probably will want more land surrounding the stream and might be unhappy about a roadway crossing it to access the western parcels. I'm not sure what MTO requirements are for development set-back from major highway interchanges. I think it might be 300m? Those two combined might kill off development potential of the western parcels.

But then again, we do have that "Open-for-Business By-Law" now, precisely to overstep things like TRCA and MTO.
 

innsertnamehere

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
14,904
Reaction score
10,110
I believe they are Employment lands under the Vaughan OP - so you would need a conversion application.

under current planning regimes that means at least a decade until they can be developed.

Of course, our current premier is promising major land use regulation reforms, so who knows.

MTO just wants a standard 14m setback from any land they own, regardless of use. Plus some noise barriers and minimal signage facing the highway.
 

WislaHD

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 21, 2013
Messages
9,194
Reaction score
7,405
Location
Midtown Toronto
MTO just wants a standard 14m setback from any land they own, regardless of use. Plus some noise barriers and minimal signage facing the highway.
I looked it up. This is correct.

What I was thinking of was this Controlled Area on page 34. Which basically means that MTO needs to give out a permit within 45 metres of a 400-series highway, or within 180 metres of the intersection of a 400-series highway. The developable parcels are ~350m away from that, so on that account it is fine. (Nor would it be arduous for the province to get a permit from it's own ministry.)

In any case, it does seem as though the lands could be developed, access to the road network provided through the unnamed service road surrounding the 407 station. On usual time-line, I agree these lands would probably be near a decade away from being sold to developers, but the Premier is directing all the agencies to go on a spelling spree, so who knows.
 

innsertnamehere

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
14,904
Reaction score
10,110
the permits come at site plan application stage so the private developer would need one before construction could start - but it's more so routine review, it wouldn't be a make or break factor in the development.
 

Woodbridge_Heights

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 14, 2008
Messages
2,877
Reaction score
682
If we went down that road an alternative road access option might be to the north via a bridge over the 407. Commerce st and exchange ave seem to be good candidates...
 

Leo_Chan

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 13, 2016
Messages
3,201
Reaction score
1,956
Location
Richmond Hill
If we went down that road an alternative road access option might be to the north via a bridge over the 407. Commerce st and exchange ave seem to be good candidates...
There's already plans for a mid-block crossing over Highway 400 from Colossus Drive to Interchange Way. But in terms of a mid-block crossing over Highway 407, one could be aligned with Commerce Street (the one that intersects Highway 7) and in the future when the buildings are redevelop then it can be connected. Then in the far future, a connection with Adesso Drive to Steeles Ave. However, if anything is to be developed on the west side of Highway 407 Station, that terrible and confusing access from Jane Street needs to be fixed.
 

WislaHD

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 21, 2013
Messages
9,194
Reaction score
7,405
Location
Midtown Toronto
York U station has plenty of room for growth as the University has a lot of room to grow. And not just on campus. North of Steeles is basically empty. Which means plenty of growth for Pioneer Village as well.

View attachment 167868
^Practically empty as in it only has a large UPS facility, a rail corridor and a grave yard.....none of which scream out "develop these lands now!" ;)
This will certainly increase usage at Pioneer Village and York University (to a lesser extent). From the Vaughan Secondary Plan

View attachment 168304

From the Secondary Plan:

1545364174734.png


The SP is calling for 10-11k, and realistically developers here will shoot for taller and more dense than prescribed. I am not sure if that figure includes the UPS centre or not.

The present ridership of Pioneer Village station is 17,300 daily riders. If we call full build-out scenario as 15k, and assume a conservative 30% transit mode share, that is roughly 4,500 daily riders that could be added. (Unless I should be doubling that figure to 9,000, for morning & evening ridership.)
 

44 North

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 8, 2010
Messages
3,425
Reaction score
1,804
Location
Ward 28
From the Secondary Plan:

View attachment 168365

The SP is calling for 10-11k, and realistically developers here will shoot for taller and more dense than prescribed. I am not sure if that figure includes the UPS centre or not.

The present ridership of Pioneer Village station is 17,300 daily riders. If we call full build-out scenario as 15k, and assume a conservative 30% transit mode share, that is roughly 4,500 daily riders that could be added. (Unless I should be doubling that figure to 9,000, for morning & evening ridership.)

And that's just the Vaughan side. Antica House and Antica Towers have a huge infill opportunity. Hopefully Sorbara Group are aware of the land value uplift opportunity the subway extension afforded them.
 

Bureaucromancer

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 7, 2010
Messages
369
Reaction score
316
Hopefully I don't dox myself, but I was involved with taking a look at that parcel back when subway construction started...

Short version is, yeah, accessibility is a problem; probably more of one than it even looks like once fire code is considered. In any case, despite whatever's being used now the land belongs to the MTO who are holding it for any OMSF type facility they need should the 407 transitway gets built (and they do insist for these purposes that they are protecting for rail as much as the busway everyone knows it is).

Good luck getting this out of their clutches in other words.
 

thettctransitfanatic

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 7, 2017
Messages
1,547
Reaction score
463
There's already plans for a mid-block crossing over Highway 400 from Colossus Drive to Interchange Way. But in terms of a mid-block crossing over Highway 407, one could be aligned with Commerce Street (the one that intersects Highway 7) and in the future when the buildings are redevelop then it can be connected. Then in the far future, a connection with Adesso Drive to Steeles Ave. However, if anything is to be developed on the west side of Highway 407 Station, that terrible and confusing access from Jane Street needs to be fixed.

Maybe extend one of above streets south over the 407, so that if there is development, there is pretty good access
 

thettctransitfanatic

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 7, 2017
Messages
1,547
Reaction score
463
From the Secondary Plan:

View attachment 168365

The SP is calling for 10-11k, and realistically developers here will shoot for taller and more dense than prescribed. I am not sure if that figure includes the UPS centre or not.

The present ridership of Pioneer Village station is 17,300 daily riders. If we call full build-out scenario as 15k, and assume a conservative 30% transit mode share, that is roughly 4,500 daily riders that could be added. (Unless I should be doubling that figure to 9,000, for morning & evening ridership.)

Now, the question is, with star
From the Secondary Plan:

View attachment 168365

The SP is calling for 10-11k, and realistically developers here will shoot for taller and more dense than prescribed. I am not sure if that figure includes the UPS centre or not.

The present ridership of Pioneer Village station is 17,300 daily riders. If we call full build-out scenario as 15k, and assume a conservative 30% transit mode share, that is roughly 4,500 daily riders that could be added. (Unless I should be doubling that figure to 9,000, for morning & evening ridership.)

What lands are being considering for redevelopment? Ones around 407 station, Pioneer Village station, it's not clear to me with the talk here.
 

Neutrino

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 4, 2017
Messages
1,207
Reaction score
880
@thettctransitfanatic The Vaughan SP applies to the area around PV Station. Question about said SP: it shows a bunch of streets emerging onto Steeles - are they all to be signaled intersections? If so, that would make Steeles unbearable (even worse than the Jane and Keele intersections already are at rush) for both drivers and users of the 60 bus. If it were up to me, I would make those streets right in, right out and make the new primary east-west street also a right in right out. Want to go north on Keele? Sure, take the west exit and take another right on Hwy 7 to reach Keele. Want to go north on Jane? Take the east exit and another right on Steeles to reach Jane. Left turns will snarl Steeles and Keele traffic too much.
 

Top