unimaginative2
Senior Member
Jaycola's definitely on the right track here. City-wide density stats rean't really very informative, especially when much of the municipality is undeveloped.
Richmond Hill Yonge Line 1 North Subway Extension | ?m | ?s | Metrolinx
- Thread starter 299 bloor call control.
- Start date
hkric88
Active Member
Indeed, Hong Kong's overall density is lower than downtown Toronto's, and, depending on how familiar you are with Hong Kong, that seems pretty ridiculous, but when you compare Hong Kong's overal land area to their population, that's what you get. It's not a very accurate picture of what is going on in any sense. I think its irresponsible to make any judgment regarding overall densities of a city, especially a city that still has greenfeild lands..
xtremesniper
Active Member
I would be fine with what their current plan is (to make Viva Blue from RHC and up) but the problem I have with it (and this is not a truly valid point overall, but it is for me) that I'd still have to make 2 separate transfers to get downtown. I'd get to Yonge, then take the Blue southbound for one block before transferring yet again to the southbound subway (and pay a double fare).
Honestly, this isn't going to go well with converting car drivers into transit riders until we figure out some sort of fare integration, or just abolish the double fare altogether and figure out who the money goes to depending on where the trip originated. Doesn't that work? It would even out by the end of the day. If someone is leaving York Region to go into Toronto, they're obviously coming back at some point, so if you just allocate the fares collected depending on which jurisdiction they're in, it will all even out eventually. Or is that just too logical?
TJ O'Pootertoot
Senior Member
Yeah, I get the sense Amphibius really doesn't know the area that well.
There is definitely some waiting going on.
No doubt the private landowners are waiting to make sure the subway is coming and no doubt the recession is slowing things. Still, it's clearly only a short matter of time until those sites you cite are gone.
The planning is there now. Markham is in the process of rezoning all that land for 2.5-3.5FSI and Vaughan is a few months behind them in doing the same. I heard a rumour (and it was just a rumour) Roy Foss got offered $90M for that land and while it seems crazy....it didn't seem TOTALLY crazy before the recession.
FYI - here is what Vaughan is doing:
http://www.yorkregion.com/article/89745
And here is what Markham is doing:
http://www.yorkregion.com/article/82661
So, know the facts before you say there's little potential for development and intensification.
Amphibius
Banned
I wasn't saying that there isn't potential for urban growth. I'm sure 30-40 years from now 407/7/Yonge will have the numbers to justify an extesnion. However as a priority I'm posing the question: should a Planned Community take precedence over Preexisting Density in already established UBCs (SCC, MCC, Downtown Toronto, Midtown Toronto i.e. Eglinton) at this point in time? It's like a chicken-egg scenario; in RHC's case, their urban growth potential seems tied to and contingent upon extending the subway there, when for other UBCs the opposite has occured. They've flourished with nothing more grandscale than local/express bus or light-rail transit and yet have achieved high population densities, have skyscrapers, etc.
I think it's signficant that Markham residents would have multiple alternate N-S feeders with which to link them to the downtown (Lincolnville GO Line; VIVA Green; Transit City along Don Mills, Warden and McCowan connecting to subway lines). This places far less emphasis on the Richmond Hill Centre transit hub for Toronto-oriented commutes, unless commuters desire actual points off Yonge St. Should VIVA Purple ever become a LRT line, it'd be oh so easy for vehicles to share the same tracks with Yonge LRT such that interlining from Cornell to Steeles-Centrepoint Stn is possible (VIVA Pink re-imagined). In others words a one-seat, transfer-free ride straight into the subway. An LRT station at RHC linking to the bus terminal and GO Stn at-grade for seamless cross-platform interchange(s), would work just as effectively as a subway would. Why couldn't that be good enough until further is warranted?
I mentioned the Promenade in my prior post because Bathurst's close enough that riders may opt to head over to Yonge to utilize the subway through Thornhill. However were a Bathurst LRT to be established, these commuters could easy well find it more convenient to enter the city via this manner instead. All points west of Bathurst will utilize the Vaughan City Centre Stn. So again, it is primarily Yonge Street which will sustain its own basis for this extension, something that can be accomplished from Steeles Avenue meanwhile establishing surafce rapid transit to the north; improving accessibility, triggering urban infill and becoming the foundation of light rail all across York Region.
marcus_a_j
Senior Member
The answer is not yes or no (that a planned community should take precedence over an existing one), but that there should not be any preference for one over another. Ideally, they should all get the appropriate form of infrastructure that is warranted there, when it is warranted. Yes I think the Yonge extension to Hwy 7/407 is warranted now, and by planning these new neighbourhoods around the extension, transportation and community planning are done in sync.
We shouldn't compare one UGC (Urban Growth Centre) to another in terms of which UGC should get a subway first when these UGC's have unique histories and development patterns, and are within different jurisdictions with their own politics and planning systems. There are multiple different municipal councils (community, city, regional) and transit systems all trying to serve themselves. Each one is planning their transit systems around what they feel is necessary, and Metrolinx/Province have pretty much given them what they asked for.
xtremesniper
Active Member
If we don't develop transit lines in anticipation of massive community growth, then we'll just end up with more work later when we realize the area was not designed with transit in mind, and it may therefore require everyone to use cars to get places because the businesses and homes weren't designed as pedestrian friendly. Kind of like what we have right now.
So both are important, but you can't just put these kinds of projects in the back seat because other areas are struggling with self-inflicted congestion due to their own poor planning in the past. This is our chance to do something right for a change.
So both are important, but you can't just put these kinds of projects in the back seat because other areas are struggling with self-inflicted congestion due to their own poor planning in the past. This is our chance to do something right for a change.
RedRocket191
Senior Member
^ Think of how many times a day people use the "they should have built that transit line years ago!" line. We now have an opportunity to make it happen.
Disparishun
Active Member
The numbers are there now. You were asking about something different -- density along Yonge Street.
Nope. We should be firing on all cylinders. Your beggar-thy-neighbour approach to transit planning doesn't work.
This isn't about east Markham, which just isn't relevant to the Yonge Subway Extension. And yes, commuters desire actual points off Yonge St.
Run that by me again? Bathurst LRT? What route [EDIT: i.e. what endpoints for this planned Bathurst LRT]?
For "Bathurst" you mean "Dufferin", and for "Vaughan City Centre" you mean "one of the new stations on the Spadina extension", right?
Huh? No. Steeles makes very little sense as a terminus -- how did you arrive at the conclusion that it did? Continuing 4 km north to the GO/VIVA-YRT terminal at Hwy 7/407 will serve far better.
Last edited:
Disparishun
Active Member
Oh, one more thing:
Certainly not. The likelihood of Yonge Street's becoming a permanent parking lot, on the other hand, is. In fairness, this also has to do with horrid suburban street design, but I remain one of those who thinks that public transit is a good way to relieve traffic congestion.
Certainly not. The likelihood of Yonge Street's becoming a permanent parking lot, on the other hand, is. In fairness, this also has to do with horrid suburban street design, but I remain one of those who thinks that public transit is a good way to relieve traffic congestion.
xtremesniper
Active Member
Isn't that just common sense?
And a lot of people that I know in Markham go to Yonge to get downtown or to the subway. Most people west of Kennedy will still travel to Yonge to connect to Viva to get to Finch Station. It's also why Viva Pink exists... But, yes, the primary population of Markham that this extension affects is obviously Thornhill.
TJ O'Pootertoot
Senior Member
I see some of what you're saying, Amphibius...but, like, you make it sound like Bathurst/Promenade is a bigger transit hub than the subway running up Yonge Street. Moreover, it's in Vaughan whereas the Yonge subway runs right through three municipalities. Yonge will always be Yonge.
Besides - and this goes to your point about serving already-dense vs eventually-to-be-dense communities - Yonge/7 IS going to be a major transit hub. GO and Viva are there already, the subway is coming as is upgraded Viva and (eventually) the 407 Transitway. All that will make Promenade less of a hub than it is now.
I don't think it's really an either/or debate, nor is it chicken/egg...and it won't take 30 years to build up RHC. Places to Grow is for 2006-2031 and there are big targets to hit. You're right that there are underserved areas right now but I think you have to take a step back and look at the big picture. The suburbs have been sprawling and the province decided to curb that.
A big part of that is ordering the municipalities, "You have to build HERE," and "since we're making you do that, we'll do the sensible thing and extend the subway up to this point." (In the case of Yonge it's especially absurd to bring the subway to Steeles, a few KM short of a major transit hub that's only getting bigger!)
So it's anti-sprawl effort and only time will tell how much it works. The school of thought is simple: If transit isn't ready when the density is, you'll never get people out of their cars down the road (so to speak). So it's not chicken/egg -it's a holistic approach. Something that's been wholly lacking over the last quarter century of transit (non) planning in the GTA.
At the same time there is now a regional planning authority and they prioritized what they had on the table. Transit City is flawed IMHO, but that was Toronto's answer to dealing with its own problems. Transit planning is not a zero sum game.
Besides - and this goes to your point about serving already-dense vs eventually-to-be-dense communities - Yonge/7 IS going to be a major transit hub. GO and Viva are there already, the subway is coming as is upgraded Viva and (eventually) the 407 Transitway. All that will make Promenade less of a hub than it is now.
I don't think it's really an either/or debate, nor is it chicken/egg...and it won't take 30 years to build up RHC. Places to Grow is for 2006-2031 and there are big targets to hit. You're right that there are underserved areas right now but I think you have to take a step back and look at the big picture. The suburbs have been sprawling and the province decided to curb that.
A big part of that is ordering the municipalities, "You have to build HERE," and "since we're making you do that, we'll do the sensible thing and extend the subway up to this point." (In the case of Yonge it's especially absurd to bring the subway to Steeles, a few KM short of a major transit hub that's only getting bigger!)
So it's anti-sprawl effort and only time will tell how much it works. The school of thought is simple: If transit isn't ready when the density is, you'll never get people out of their cars down the road (so to speak). So it's not chicken/egg -it's a holistic approach. Something that's been wholly lacking over the last quarter century of transit (non) planning in the GTA.
At the same time there is now a regional planning authority and they prioritized what they had on the table. Transit City is flawed IMHO, but that was Toronto's answer to dealing with its own problems. Transit planning is not a zero sum game.
Last edited:
Disparishun
Active Member
You'd think, but not to those who dread granting higher-order transit to areas where traffic crawls at a standstill lest it prevent those further along the line from getting a seat!
Good point. I forgot about that.
(It's why I keep harping on the importance of retrofitting RH GO into a frequent N-S Express line with stations intersecting with the Finch bus/LRT, Sheppard subway, Eglinton LRT, and something downtown and feasible pre-Union. Why should people in the east quadrant have to go all the way west just to go south?)
xtremesniper
Active Member
That's a question I've been wondering for years... That area of town (just east of the 404 and just west of Kennedy) is in this dead-zone for a useful way to use transit, let alone getting downtown. It's really poorly planned out, so most people end up driving (naturally).
Disparishun
Active Member
And it's a steadily densifying area of town, too. And -- drumroll -- hence the beauty of rejigging the RH GO line as a N-S Express. Most of the rights of way are already there, so it'd be a lot cheaper than many other options. With stops at the Finch LRT/bus at Leslie, the Sheppard subway, the Eglinton LRT, and downtown before Union, I think you'd serve quite a lot of the demand and alleviate the congestion on the Yonge line for far cheaper than, say, the DRL (which is, nonetheless needed) will cost.