I'll apologize in advance for re-hashing arugments from another thread but....
Well, that's an opinion but I think stopping it at Steeles is worse than silly. As I pointed out, that density is directly contingent on stopping the subway THERE. If you stop it short of the designated growth centre you are purposefully mis-aligning the province's growth and transit plans. You're entitled to believe the GO service is adequate but all the plans are based on the assumption they will have GO and the subway. If either doesn't materialize, neither does the plan. Unlike other GO corridors, here we are talking about Yonge Street, and a GO line that dives off into a valley. You can't have a regional network when you fail to make obviously natural connections, like a major growth centre, on Yonge Street, amidst contiguous existing development, just north of the 416/905 border.
There is actually no logic whatsoever to stopping at Steeles except that someone drew a line there 40 years ago on a map. This is what it looks like today and there is very clearly no difference in built form or anything else between the north and south sides of the municipal border.
View attachment 25036
With all due respect, the only people who advocate it stopping at Steeles are people who live in Toronto who never go up beyond it.
I think this was already addressed but the point is really quite straightforward: what we have now, for the first time, is a growth plan for the larger region and it advocates curbing sprawl by requiring transit-oriented infill. You can't legislatively require municipalities to provide infill and then not provide the infrastructure or it won't work and you will get more sprawl. Or you could be really spiteful and legislatively demand they intensify at a specific location and decide to build the transit 2 kilometres away, I suppose. I don't know why you would, but you could.