[sunnyraytoronto]

Someone needs to get out of the house...

Agreed,..... and once Bazis finish and reopens EmeraldPark TTC subway entrance like it was supposed to 20 months ago, I can finally use EmeraldPark TTC Subway entrance to go somewhere! ;p

 

[amnesiajune]

You see, Canada's immigration policy has changed dramatically since our parent's, grandparent's, great-grandparent's generation where poor immigrants came here with just the clothes on their back to scrape for a living. Canada's immigration policy is now so selective that most of us who are already in Canada wouldn't even qualify!

I'm a first generation Canadian, so cut the smug. Condoland is not representative of Canada's immigration policy by any means. If you want something more representative, go hang out in the Forest Laneway apartments, or in the old apartment buildings and townhouses at Bayview and Sheppard where I grew up, or the ones up at Yonge and Steeles. The vast majority of people who come to Canada aren't rolling into the country with millions to drop on a house and exotic car. Usually they have nothing to their name except clothes, personal belongings and a university degree. Dropping $100,000 a year on mortgage payments is pretty much out of the question.

Non-occupancy study only shows condos are more attractive to oversea buyers who are frequently out of town or to flip-pers.

What it actually shows is that people who want to make a quick buck will go after the detached houses. You probably see that at Yonge & Sheppard more than anywhere else... Buy a bungalow for $2 million at most, tear it down, build a McMansion and sell it for upwards of $3 million. And our city's stellar planning department makes that ridiculously easy to do but drags you to the OMB if you wanna turn it into two or three townhouses.

No wonder why municipalities are building high-density urban centres,... to increase their property tax revenue!

Municipalities have been opposing urban centres for the most part. That's why you see those notice boards at every proposed development. It's usually the same story - developer makes bold proposal, city says no, developer goes to OMB, city forced to compromise and allow a less bold development that was probably what the developers originally had in mind. When you look at somewhere like Vancouver or San Francisco, it's a much less complicated process - developer makes proposal, city says no, nothing happens. Luckily there's an appeal process here in Ontario or our housing market would make Vancouver houses seem like chump change.

Why are detached single residential houses favoured by developers? Usually these properties are on larger lots and thus developers has to deal with less sellers, thus, less logistics and total cost,... all developer want is the land, not a bunch of semi-detached on tiny lots with many individual sellers to deal with.

Developers have usually been going after unused/underused land - parking lots, shopping plazas, low-density retail, industrial areas, etc. - not detached houses. Even detached houses are on relatively small lots for high-density development. The most that can be done with them is usually townhouses - look at the sort of development that's been happening on Bayview north of Sheppard.

 

[Edward Skira]

Developers have usually been going after unused/underused land - parking lots, shopping plazas, low-density retail, industrial areas, etc. - not detached houses. Even detached houses are on relatively small lots for high-density development. The most that can be done with them is usually townhouses - look at the sort of development that's been happening on Bayview north of Sheppard.

I doubt the city would allow anything bigger than townhouses on Bayview north of Sheppard. Whole blocks of detached houses were bought up and developed on Yonge from the 401 to Finch so it is doable.

 

[pipolchap]

So let's do ReImagining Yonge Street Study proposal WITHOUT the cycle track,...
- keep the on-street parking and rush-hour traffic lanes
- extend the tree-lined centre median down to Highway 401 and up to Finch Hydro Corridor
- add the 2m wide in-ground tree planters and up graded street furniture to the new pedestrian sidewalks
- repave the 3 northbound and 3 southbound traffic lanes of Yonge Street

What a nightmare! I'm glad you're not a planner, who have expertise in these things. The planners, with all those years of experience and education, even believe the centre median of trees is a waste! They left it there to appease the dinosaurs left in the neighborhood.

The area is evolving and so are its residents. Your proposal sound's like a proposal for Richmond Hill or Markham, somewhere where you'd probably like to live. You really should consider cashing out and moving if the plans don't go your way! Hurry, the prices are going up there as well and you might be priced out...

PipolChap, I've been advocating for a variety of infrastructure improvements including cycling infrastructure from the local councillors, mayor, MPP, MP, city staff, TTC, local retailers, provincial staff, developers-land owners, local ratepayer groups, etc,... for years. And I'm pretty sure you don't bother, I know all the local advocates! And best of all, I get things done,...

Why don't you use your connections to change the amazing plan placed forth to your suburban dream? or are you "BS"ing?

 

[sunnyraytoronto]

What a nightmare! I'm glad you're not a planner, who have expertise in these things. The planners, with all those years of experience and education, even believe the centre median of trees is a waste! They left it there to appease the dinosaurs left in the neighborhood.

The area is evolving and so are its residents. Your proposal sound's like a proposal for Richmond Hill or Markham, somewhere where you'd probably like to live. You really should consider cashing out and moving if the plans don't go your way! Hurry, the prices are going up there as well and you might be priced out...

Well, if cycle track replaces the on-street parking and rush-hour-traffic lanes on Yonge Street "pushes out" the ethnic Korean, Persian and Chinese stores currently on Yonge Street in NorthYorkCentre,.... then I'll happily join the wave of visible minorities following our ethnic stores pushed out of the area.

PipolChap,.... since you want so much cycling infrastructure in your neighbourhood,.... you should actually move to a neighbourhood that actually have lots of cycling infrastructure and actual cyclists too,.... it's called downtown Toronto. Go to Yonge Street and ride south,.... if you ride into the lake, you've gone too far. ;p

The tree-lined centre median and tree-lined pedestrian sidewalk is favoured by many of the locals, especially those in the high-density condos of NorthYorkCentreSecondaryPlan area since it'll give them much needed real green space (to compliment the Green of EmeraldPark). Their young urban demographic would hardly classify them as "dinosaurs". As you can see from this Statistics Canada census tract,.... of the high density condo area bounded by Yonge and Doris from Sheppard to Church Ave which is basically all high-density condo and no single residential houses,.... there's 0.0 cycling mode share in this area - thus, the local high density condo residents are the ones most resistant to adding cycling infrastructure to the area. And they make up more than 2/3 of this ward's population.

Why don't you use your connections to change the amazing plan placed forth to your suburban dream? or are you "BS"ing?

See the above StatisticCanada data,.... StatisticCanada don't BS!

First of all, connection and contacts really doesn't matter much. These are mainly public figures or civil servants who are supposed to be accessible to all equally,... both me and you! But you like most, probably don't even make an attempt to access them. At the end of the day, for elected officials - it's really which idea and concept will benefit the majority of their voters the most since they must ultimately be responsible to their voters. The current ReImagining Yonge Street Study proposal will only benefit a few cyclist at the cost of many other local residents.

As a previous post mentioned,... I've advocated for cycling infrastructure in the area for years,...
http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/thread...-rosario-varacalli.4829/page-136#post-1164206
You look at Tridel HullmarkCentre where we got a bike station with shower and restroom facilities install with 132 public bike parking spaces,... but for what? Nobody uses it,... at the peak in the summer, you might find at most 10 bikes parked there while 122 bike parking spaces remain empty! There's too much cycling infrastructure at Tridel HullmarkCenter,.... the problem with that is the opportunity cost - for a given development, CityPlanning and Councillor requires the developer to spend X amount of money on Section 37 CommunityBenefits and on-site parkland dedications, etc,... and it's a question of how that fixed amount of money is allocated,..... here, way too much was spent on extra cycling infrastructure above the minimum required (IE: the excess cycling infrastructure amounts to over 60 extra public bike parking spaces and bike station facilities with extra shower and 3 extra restrooms all with dedicated space in the P1 parking level where a typical car parking space could cost $50K (based on EmeraldPark current parking space cost),.... how much did all this stuff cost?). This was at the cost of something else that could have benefitted the community more,... like on-site day care facilities or the public square which everyone seems to enjoy could have been made much larger with better features like more public sitting areas, much larger water feature like a reflection pool/skating rink and restroom facilities,.... There's always an opportunity cost,.... what would have benefitted the majority of the local residents the most?

I don't think Yonge at any point can be treated as a freeway to the 401. Most people would love to avoid Yonge but the problem is the next on-ramp west of Yonge is at the Allen, which is adds 20 minutes to the drive along Sheppard, while driving east to Bayview along Sheppard is just as congested as driving south on Yonge. As of this point, Yonge street should be focused on car traffic first, and bike lanes should be sent to the ring roads on either side. It's not preferred, but a necessity due to real life.

PipolChap,... since you cycle in the area,.... let's say you have the option of installing one type of cycling infrastructure (cycle track, buffered bike lanes, unprotected bike lanes or multi-use trails) on Yonge Street or (west-side of Beecroft Rd and east-side of Doris Ave),... which cycling infrastructure would you pick to install on which street(s) and why?

 

[sunnyraytoronto]

I doubt the city would allow anything bigger than townhouses on Bayview north of Sheppard. Whole blocks of detached houses were bought up and developed on Yonge from the 401 to Finch so it is doable.

Actually, it depends what part of Bayview north of Sheppard,..... northeast corner of Bayview and Sheppard already has condo tower and another is proposed for northeast corner joining condos directly to the east,.... Area immediately northwest of Bayview & Sheppard is technically part of SheppardEastSubwayCorridorSecondaryPlan Area,.... townhouse in this area south of SpringGarden are usually there as transition into existing single residential neighbourhoods.
https://www1.toronto.ca/planning/35-secondary-plans.pdf

Bayview north of Sheppard for the most part isn't even part of any secondary plan area and thus is only subject to very limited intensification. Townhouse development along Bayview north of SpringGarden Ave are not subject to any secondary plan thus, their best hope falls under city's intensification policy along Avenues,... and currently it only allows townhouses on a site by site basis,.....

Developers have usually been going after unused/underused land - parking lots, shopping plazas, low-density retail, industrial areas, etc. - not detached houses. Even detached houses are on relatively small lots for high-density development. The most that can be done with them is usually townhouses - look at the sort of development that's been happening on Bayview north of Sheppard.

That's what I've been saying,.... developer parcel large lots by going after larger lots to minimize number of sellers to deal with,.... Shopping plaza, churches and car dealerships are favoured because they're often on large lots of land and only one owner to deal with.

Parking lot like what's at 4800 Yonge now and what used to be at EmeraldPark site were just temporary parking lots placed there by the developer as revenue generators while the development application goes through CityPlanning or in both these cases got previous development approvals decades ago but original developer decided not to proceed,..... but the land is often assembled from detached single residential houses,.... as seen by this 1981 image of EmeraldPark site (hexagon structure is TTC bus terminal on Sheppard, next block south is NestleBuilding/4800 Yonge site, next block south is LansingUnitedChurch/EmeraldPark site):

I already covered this,.... what was previously on the EmeraldPark site,... but I guess AmnesiaJune forgot,....
http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/thread...-rosario-varacalli.4829/page-114#post-1071454

NorthYorkCentreSecondaryPlan area was originally just strip plazas, churches, small industries, municipal buildings, garages along Yonge Street,.... and single residential houses off Yonge Street,..... as you can see from this aerial image from 1970,... when Yonge Subway extension to Sheppard & Finch was under construction and City of NorthYork was starting to dream big under mayor Mel Lastman,.... dreaming of creating a downtown along Yonge Street in NorthYork,...... Note: The first major development for NorthYorkCentre, SheppardCentre haven't even started construction yet.

Compared to current image from GoogleEarth,... shows that about 75% of the land now used for NorthYorkCentreSecondaryPlan area (mainly between Beecroft Rd and Doris Ave) originated from single residential detached houses on property lots consistent with the area.

 

[sunnyraytoronto]

I'm a first generation Canadian, so cut the smug. Condoland is not representative of Canada's immigration policy by any means. If you want something more representative, go hang out in the Forest Laneway apartments, or in the old apartment buildings and townhouses at Bayview and Sheppard where I grew up, or the ones up at Yonge and Steeles. The vast majority of people who come to Canada aren't rolling into the country with millions to drop on a house and exotic car. Usually they have nothing to their name except clothes, personal belongings and a university degree. Dropping $100,000 a year on mortgage payments is pretty much out of the question.

Surely you realize you can't compare the condo residents of EmeraldPark to those of SheppardCentre Forest Laneway apartments,.... SheppardCentre Forest Laneway apartment were built in the mid-1970s and are no longer representative of the NorthYorkCentre area which has witness about 60 new condo tower development in the last 20 years.

Likewise, the "old apartment buildings and townhouses at Bayview and Sheppard" where you grew up "or the ones up at Yonge and Steeles" are not within the NorthYorkCentreSecondaryPlan area which was our original discussion about it being the "new Spadina".

There's a wide range of new immigrants into Canada from Syrian refugees to tycoons,.... generations ago it was mainly poor; for decades now Canada is seen as politically safe haven with racially diverse cities thus making Canada attractive to wealthy immigrants. Going forward, Canada will likely see even more wealthy immigrants and foreign investment as the US deals with a Trump presidency.

What it actually shows is that people who want to make a quick buck will go after the detached houses. You probably see that at Yonge & Sheppard more than anywhere else... Buy a bungalow for $2 million at most, tear it down, build a McMansion and sell it for upwards of $3 million. And our city's stellar planning department makes that ridiculously easy to do but drags you to the OMB if you wanna turn it into two or three townhouses.

Going from bungalow to McMansion is usually within zoning; there might be minor Committee Of Adjustment variances typically to increase coverage from 30% official max to the 32% typical of the area. But going from (bungalow) Single Residential (R4) to townhouse development requires zoning changes which requires community consultations and thus CityPlanning and Councillor will likely oppose it,... to the OMB if needed. (BTW, with all the zoning changes EmeraldPark required for it's early 2010 CityPlanning Final Report,... after all these years, it's still the most complex development application and most lengthy CityPlanning Final Report in NorthYorkCentreSecondaryPlan Area.)

Actually, your "Buy a bungalow for $2 million at most, tear it down, build a McMansion and sell it for upwards of $3 million" is wrong, since it forget the fact that the "build a McMansion" construction cost is about $1million! Thus, in your example, you'd be lucky to break even! I guess, that's why you're not in the tycoon category.

So why does it happen? Because they won't be selling the McMansion "for upwards of $3million",..... First they buy an old bungalow on standard 50'x130' lot for about $2.1million,... then city application, committee of adjustment, OMB, construction will add at least 2 years to the process,... and when they actually sell the McMansion in 2 year, the price of a McMansion won't be today's $3.5million price, it'll be will be closer to $5million given the current rate of price increase for detached houses,.... typically for a huge 40-50% profit margin. This is why when it comes to properties on large lots,... builder-investor types are always able to outbid real families looking to buy a house and this is the biggest factor driving up the price of detached houses in this area.

And I have new immigrant neighbours moving into new $3.5million McMansions after they spend their first few months or year here living in condo. Some skip the living in condo stage, while they wait for completion of their newly ordered $3.5million McMansion, they'll buy up a large older detached $2.5million house nearby to use as a temporary home!

Municipalities have been opposing urban centres for the most part. That's why you see those notice boards at every proposed development. It's usually the same story - developer makes bold proposal, city says no, developer goes to OMB, city forced to compromise and allow a less bold development that was probably what the developers originally had in mind. When you look at somewhere like Vancouver or San Francisco, it's a much less complicated process - developer makes proposal, city says no, nothing happens. Luckily there's an appeal process here in Ontario or our housing market would make Vancouver houses seem like chump change.

Practically every 905 municipality in the GTA from Oshawa to Burlington to NewMarket has been trying to build their own urban centre downtown area,.... why? To maximize tax revenue on their fix amount of land by stacking property tax payers on top of each other. They've been watching relatively suburban places like NorthYorkCentre doing it for decades,... since the mid-1970s

 

[pipolchap]

At the end of the day, for elected officials - it's really which idea and concept will benefit the majority of their voters the most since they must ultimately be responsible to their voters. The current ReImagining Yonge Street Study proposal will only benefit a few cyclist at the cost of many other local residents.

I agree that elected officials will implement a plan that benefits the majority, that is why they had the study done with the locals, and this proposal accomplishes that! You're just sore that it didn't go your way. Suck it up! The current proposal will benefit FUTURE cyclists in the area, including my children, who I currently make them use sidewalks. It annoys pedestrians, but there's no choice.

In this city, cars always had the privilege of using the roads. I came upon this quote with the whole Trump election, “When you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.” The city is just trying to do just that, give cyclist a share of the road. (It's not even an equal share!)

You look at Tridel HullmarkCentre where we got a bike station with shower and restroom facilities install with 132 public bike parking spaces,... but for what? Nobody uses it

It's called planning. They are planning for the FUTURE! That's what makes for good infrastructure! If you keep building for the present, you will have to keep rebuilding! This wastes money! I can't believe I have to spell this out for you on an "urban" forum.

A key question that planners should ask, and do ask, is this: Would you feel safe allowing your elderly parents and young children to walk/cycle safely along/across Yonge? For me, not in its current state, where drivers don't even look when they make turns. It's unacceptable as it is now.

 

[sunnyraytoronto]

I agree that elected officials will implement a plan that benefits the majority, that is why they had the study done with the locals, and this proposal accomplishes that! You're just sore that it didn't go your way. Suck it up! The current proposal will benefit FUTURE cyclists in the area, including my children, who I currently make them use sidewalks. It annoys pedestrians, but there's no choice.

Oh,... "the locals",.... are these the same "locals" from the high-density condos in NorthYorkCentre that StatisticsCanada Census has already shown to have 0.0% cycling mode share or "the locals" from the entire Ward23 Willowdale that has 0.3-0.4% Bicycle mode share. See page 9 of NorthYorkCentre Active Transportation Report:
https://www1.toronto.ca/City Of Toronto/Toronto Public Health/Healthy Public Policy/Built Environment/Files/pdf/AT/WALK CYCLE MOVE North York Centre Final Report May 2014.pdf

The results of ReImagining Yonge Study consultations were pretty much evenly split between,... the real area locals were voting for the tree-lined centre median,.... but the non-locals were voting for cycling infrastructure on Yonge Street.

PipolChap, your so called "locals" are really just cycling advocates from outside the area trying to influence the ReImagining Yonge Street Study,... Here's the twitter account from CycleToronto encouraging their members to come show up at these meetings via their Yonge Loves Bikes twitter campaign: https://twitter.com/cycleyonge?lang=en

In this city, cars always had the privilege of using the roads. I came upon this quote with the whole Trump election, “When you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.” The city is just trying to do just that, give cyclist a share of the road. (It's not even an equal share!)

Huh? So you're saying,.... Drivers in cars on Yonge Street in NorthYorkCentre should feel "privilege" to be driving in one of the worst traffic congestion gridlock in NorthAmerica. Well then, after ReImagining Yonge Street Study proposal local drivers will be even more "privilege" to be driving in the absolute worst traffic congestion gridlock in the entire world!

Cycling advocates downtown always argue their "privilege" entitled share of road infrastructure should be based percentage of road users (cyclist vs pedestrian vs drivers). In other words, if on Bloor Street for example, of all users of Bloor Street: 1/3 are cyclist, 1/3 are pedestrians, 1/3 are drivers (I'm just BSing the data),.... then of the city right-of-way cross-section property on Bloor Street: 1/3 of the space should be for cycling infrastructure, 1/3 of the space should be for pedestrians infrastructure (sidewalk), and 1/3 of the space should be for driver infrastructure (traffic lanes).

Using that method advocated by cyclist advocates,..... what percentage of the city's right-of-way cross-section of Yonge Street in NorthYorkCentre should be dedicated to cycling infrastructure? What percentage of Yonge Street users are cyclists VS pedestrian VS drivers???? All data shows the percentage of cyclists on Yonge Street is extremely low and the data I've already shown is there's 0.0% cycle mode share among the local residents of the high density developments in the Yonge corridor of NorthYorkCentre. But yet, here's the ReImagining Yonge Street Study proposing 14.6-16.9% (2.7m cycle tracks X2 of city right-of-way of typically 32m-37m) of the city's right-of-way property cross-section,.... at the cost of pedestrian and driver share of the city's right-of-way,.... Clearly this is excessive given the lack of any cycling volume in the area.

It's called planning. They are planning for the FUTURE! That's what makes for good infrastructure! If you keep building for the present, you will have to keep rebuilding! This wastes money! I can't believe I have to spell this out for you on an "urban" forum.

A key question that planners should ask, and do ask, is this: Would you feel safe allowing your elderly parents and young children to walk/cycle safely along/across Yonge? For me, not in its current state, where drivers don't even look when they make turns. It's unacceptable as it is now.

That's why you really should consider moving downtown where they already have the cycling infrastructure you want,..... and fellow like minded cyclists fighting for more,....


PipolChap,.... you want to talk planning,... fine, we'll talk planning,... and let's bring this discussion back to EmeraldPark,....

In CityPlanning, when a development application comes in and requires zoning changes (height, density, usage, etc,...) which often result in increase density in the area with increase traffic congestion, more crowded streets and public resources, shadowing, etc,.... these increase negative elements for the locals residents already living in the community. Thus, CityPlanning requires the developer to contribute X-amount depending on the size of the development for various allocation of infrastructure improvement for the local area including Section37 CommunityBenefits & park-land dedication,.... the purpose is to increase the positive elements for the local residents already living in the community,.... and hopefully the positive and negative elements balances out,.....

Your comment that these developer's Section37 CommunityBenefit and parkland dedication contribution should be for infrastructure improvement for "FUTURE planning" doesn't benefit the current local residents for which these these developer's Section37 CommunityBenefit and parkland dedication contribution are supposed to be allocated for,.... thus, going forward, I will keep that in mind and advocate less for local cycling infrastructure,.... and more for what local residents need now! Thanks PipolChap,... that's an important point.

Look at EmeraldPark,... development application came into CityPlanning in Summer 2008, CityPlanning approval, settlement amount and Final Report in Early 2010, EmeraldPark residents started moving-in in Spring and Fall 2015,..... one of the biggest Section37 CommunityBenefit contribution will be LansingUnitedChurch commmunity centre which won't be complete until April 2017 (ideally should have kicked in at same time residents moved in),... there's already a long time line for current local residents to wait for their positive benefits from the development,.... but for those community benefits to go to FUTURE residents at the cost of current local residents,.... that's beyond comprehension.

CityPlanning required EmeraldPark developer to contribute about $6.7million (2010 dollars) towards construction of new community centre at LansingUnitedChurch which will become a community hub benefitting the current local residents in the neighbouring communities and new residents of EmeraldPark as soon as it opens in April 2017
http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/thread...-rosario-varacalli.4829/page-113#post-1070093

But your concept of infrastructure "planning for the FUTURE" would have been instead of the developer contribution of $6.7 million to a new community centre which will become a community hub,... that $6.7 million contribution should have gone to say another Bike Station of similar size to the Bike Station at HullmarkCentre,... so the EmeraldPark Bike Station would say take over the space of the current EmeraldPark food court in first floor retail area along Beecroft Rd (Don't worry the food court and your RicoFood would move to another part of EmeraldPark mall - there's plenty of room), EmeraldPark Bike Station will host a bike shower and 3 restrooms along with 132 bike parking spaces (just like the Bike Station built at HullmarkCentre) all in the space on first floor retail level of EmeraldPark currently occupied by its Food Court and stores along Beecroft Rd.

Which of the above 2 options would be more beneficial to residents of the local communities? A community centre in a park "opening soon",.... or another empty bike station - that's "planning for the FUTURE"?

NorthYorkCentre has gone through an intense amount of intensification over the last 4 decades,... the amount of new city infrastructures (school, libraries, roads, parks, community centres, etc,...) have never kept up with the increase in population,.... the city can't even provide adequate infrastructure needed for the population today,.... and yet, you want what little new infrastructure the city will be getting in terms of developer Section37 CommunityBenefit and parkland dedication contribution to go for "planning for the FUTURE",.... Wow, good luck with that. Bring your proposal of infrastructure "planning for the FUTURE" to the local councillor and CityPlanning,... and tell us how loudly they laugh.


PipolChap,.... as you can see, you're really not helping your own cause,.... if you want to continue this discussion, that's fine,.... but so far it's just giving me more ammo,...


PipolChap, you still didn't answer my question about cycling infrastructure on Yonge VS Doris & Beecroft,.... as a local cyclist, surely you must have an option here,.....

PipolChap,... since you cycle in the area,.... let's say you have the option of installing one type of cycling infrastructure (cycle track, buffered bike lanes, unprotected bike lanes or multi-use trails) on Yonge Street or (west-side of Beecroft Rd and east-side of Doris Ave),... which cycling infrastructure would you pick to install on which street(s) and why?

 

[pipolchap]

The results of ReImagining Yonge Study consultations were pretty much evenly split between,... the real area locals were voting for the tree-lined centre median,.... but the non-locals were voting for cycling infrastructure on Yonge Street.

Haha! You're still claiming you know who the locals and non-locals were by how they look and how they vote! And if they vote against your vision, they don't live in the area. Right? Hahahaha! Right? Conspiracy theory indeed!

Clearly this is excessive given the lack of any cycling volume in the area.

Future cycling volume will change, wait and see!

Bring your proposal of infrastructure "planning for the FUTURE" to the local councillor and CityPlanning,... and tell us how loudly they laugh.

No need to, city planning and local councillor are already doing it! They're doing GREAT work as it is! I'm sure they'll probably be laughing at you more...

PipolChap, you still didn't answer my question about cycling infrastructure on Yonge VS Doris & Beecroft,.... as a local cyclist, surely you must have an option here,.....

No need! From the FAQs:

Beecroft Road and Doris Avenue were created as service roads to provide an alternate route to Yonge Street.

Bike lanes were considered previously on these streets, and the City concluded that there is not adequate space for dedicated bike lanes/cycling facilities on these streets. Reconstruction and acquisition of property would be required as well, adding to the cost and complexity. A dedicated cycling facility on Yonge Street provides a continuous route for cyclists.

I'm already loving the downtown feel of the area and it will get better! I've joined car sharing, shop every other day at Whole Foods and take advantage of TTC! Cycling here is the missing link! SunnyRay, really, please consider moving! You'll be happier. Dinosaurs won't help the neighborhood progress. No matter how many long repetitive posts you make, you're not going to change what will eventually happen in the area!

 

[sunnyraytoronto]

PipolChap, you've repeatedly avoided answering a simple question about cycling infrastructure on Yonge VS Doris & Beecroft,.... as a local cyclist, surely you must have an option here,..... why???

PipolChap,... since you cycle in the area,.... let's say you have the option of installing one type of cycling infrastructure (cycle track, buffered bike lanes, unprotected bike lanes or multi-use trails) on Yonge Street or (west-side of Beecroft Rd and east-side of Doris Ave),... which cycling infrastructure would you pick to install on which street(s) and why?

No need! From the FAQs:

"Beecroft Road and Doris Avenue were created as service roads to provide an alternate route to Yonge Street."
"Bike lanes were considered previously on these streets, and the City concluded that there is not adequate space for dedicated bike lanes/cycling facilities on these streets. Reconstruction and acquisition of property would be required as well, adding to the cost and complexity. A dedicated cycling facility on Yonge Street provides a continuous route for cyclists."

Do you see what's wrong with that?

If they can only do ReImagining Yonge Street Study proposal of adding cycle tracks on Yonge Street at the cost of on-street-parking lanes and rush-hour-traffic lanes which would of course "push out" the ethnic Korean, Persian and Chinese businesses along Yonge Street,.... Why can't they do a ReImagining of Doris Ave and Beecroft Ave where,.... adding cycle tracks on Doris Ave and Beecroft Ave at the cost of on-street-parking / traffic lane,... where they already said there is excess vehicular capacity on Doris Ave & Beecroft Rd!,.... this wouldn't affect any of the business along Doris Ave and Beecroft Rd since there's practically no businesses along these Service Roads - with the exception of the food court at EmeraldPark.


Once again PipolChap,....

PipolChap,... since you cycle in the area,.... let's say you have the option of installing one type of cycling infrastructure (cycle track, buffered bike lanes, unprotected bike lanes or multi-use trails) on Yonge Street or (west-side of Beecroft Rd and east-side of Doris Ave),... which cycling infrastructure would you pick to install on which street(s) and why?

I'm already loving the downtown feel of the area and it will get better! I've joined car sharing, shop every other day at Whole Foods and take advantage of TTC! Cycling here is the missing link! SunnyRay, really, please consider moving! You'll be happier. Dinosaurs won't help the neighborhood progress. No matter how many long repetitive posts you make, you're not going to change what will eventually happen in the area!

Well,... they have all those stuff downtown,.... plus the cycling infrastructure you crave! Car-share,... heck they even have bike-share downtown,.... Thus, you'd be much happier downtown,... living in a cycling-friendly neighbourhood that you want to live in,....

Yeah, I know my repetitive posts here is useless,... that's why I campaign out there,.... and you keep on giving me more ammo,.... thanks!

Like I've always said,.... I'm not against cycling infrastructure,..... but it should be sensible cycling infrastructure,.... cycling infrastructure that doesn't screw over the majority of the local residents with massive traffic congestion gridlock,....and cycling infrastructure that doesn't "push out" the established ethnic Korean, Persian and Chinese businesses along Yonge Street.

Cycling infrastructure should be put in slowly over time,... not an aggressive one shot deal at any cost like the ReImagining Yonge Street Study proposal,.... if the cycle tracks goes in,.... that'll be the number one issue at the next election and the candidate that promises to take out the cycle track will win - regardless of their other stand,.... then good luck getting any more cycling infrastructure in the area.

 

[pipolchap]

PipolChap, you've repeatedly avoided answering a simple question about cycling infrastructure on Yonge VS Doris & Beecroft,.... as a local cyclist, surely you must have an option here,..... why???

The reason I didn't reply is because it makes no difference to the outcome. Yonge will be getting them, not D&B. In a perfect world, all 3 should have lanes. But if you really want to know, I prefer Yonge because that's where all the destinations are. If it were left to D&B, I guarantee you, you'll still see bikes on the sidewalks on Yonge and you'll be the first one to complain!

BTW, one good thing about the centre median is that there will be a place to plow the snow during a snowfall!

 

[amnesiajune]

Drivers in cars on Yonge Street in NorthYorkCentre should feel "privilege" to be driving in one of the worst traffic congestion gridlock in NorthAmerica. Well then, after ReImagining Yonge Street Study proposal local drivers will be even more "privilege" to be driving in the absolute worst traffic congestion gridlock in the entire world!

This is purely anecdotal, but I drove down Yonge yesterday from Finch to Bogert. Took me all of three minutes to drive 2 km in the middle of rush hour (5:45 PM). What's this "worst traffic congestion in North America" you're talking about? North York Centre doesn't even have the worst traffic on Yonge Street.

After actually living there for a year, I can see why bike lanes make sense on Yonge Street. During rush hour there isn't much traffic on Yonge north of Sheppard. Outside of rush hour it's a four-lane road anyways (and Go buses occasionally block two of the six lanes during rush hour).

In a perfect world, all 3 should have lanes.

You had me up to there. There's no point in putting bike lanes on all three. If you see it as a question of "fairness for cyclists" then you'd obviously want that, but practically noone will use bike lanes on Doris and Beecroft if Yonge Street has them, and that makes them useless.

 

[pipolchap]

This is purely anecdotal, but I drove down Yonge yesterday from Finch to Bogert. Took me all of three minutes to drive 2 km in the middle of rush hour (5:45 PM). What's this "worst traffic congestion in North America" you're talking about? North York Centre doesn't even have the worst traffic on Yonge Street.

After actually living there for a year, I can see why bike lanes make sense on Yonge Street. During rush hour there isn't much traffic on Yonge north of Sheppard. Outside of rush hour it's a four-lane road anyways (and Go buses occasionally block two of the six lanes during rush hour).

Haha, YES! When I'm on Yonge during rush hour as well, you don't see cars backed up going south until around Elmhurst/Greenfield. South of Sheppard to the 401 is the problem area and the City planners are not touching the 3+3 lanes there. There's a reason why these planners are employed and get paid for what they do. The councilor also wouldn't support this if he thought his job was on the line!

If you see it as a question of "fairness for cyclists" then you'd obviously want that, but practically noone will use bike lanes on Doris and Beecroft if Yonge Street has them, and that makes them useless.

Yes, the way you interpreted it was correct!

 

[amnesiajune]

Yes, the way you interpreted it was correct!

That's dumb though. Transportation decisions shouldn't be made by one group of people shaking their first at another group. It should be a question of how to move the most people given limited space. Will four lanes of traffic on Yonge and bike lanes + wider sidewalks move more people than six lanes of traffic? Probably. With that infrastructure in place, will the bike lane on Doris and Beecroft move more people than the extra bike lane? Probably not.