[leprechaun]

Once our office moves downtown TO in 2018, I'll be using that Vaughan extension daily. Thousands of people will be doing that, thus building a station on 407 makes lots of sense. In 5-7 years that area will be very different with all the towers going up.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

We got the extension to York University primarily because the expansion become politically palatable with an extension to Vaughan. For this, I won't mind the fact we extended a subway to practically nowhere and will remain hopeful that Vaughan's strategy for TOD will come into being.

Let's try to not look a gift horse in the mouth like we do so often with transit planning in this region.

 

[kEiThZ]

Because it is surrounded by defunct retailers and single story industrial warehouses

I don't get why people see this a disadvantage. To me, building to an area with big box retailers is an advantage. It means there's land available for redevelopment. People cam slam the TYSSE and particularly VMC all the want. But we'll see what they say in 15 years after the station opens....

 

[BMO]

I don't get why people see this a disadvantage. To me, building to an area with big box retailers is an advantage. It means there's land available for redevelopment. People cam slam the TYSSE and particularly VMC all the want. But we'll see what they say in 15 years after the station opens....

I don't disagree. Just look at how little development has occurred on the Bloor-Danforth line BECAUSE it went through stable neighbourhoods. It'll be much easier to get densities built in these empty fields than near a good chunck of the Eglinton Crosstown's route (*cough* Forest Hill *cough* North Toronto *Cough* Leaside *cough*). But only time will tell us if people want to live in these areas which will dictate development growth.

 

[W. K. Lis]

The only people who would be against redeveloping parking lots into higher density, would be those who are auto-addicted and those who want parking to be free.

 

[ehlow]

Once our office moves downtown TO in 2018, I'll be using that Vaughan extension daily. Thousands of people will be doing that, thus building a station on 407 makes lots of sense. In 5-7 years that area will be very different with all the towers going up.

It'd be nice if some companies with offices in suburban locations like Airport area in Mississauga and Markham moved to a place like that, suburban area but with subway access.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

It'd be nice if some companies with offices in suburban locations like Airport area in Mississauga and Markham moved to a place like that, suburban area but with subway access.

A company like KPMG?
http://urbantoronto.ca/database/projects/kpmg-vaughan

It'll take some time, no doubt, but they should be able to attract some marquee employers, just like Markham Centre has. Speaking of which, I don't see anyone here commenting on the report Neptis put out today. People who think there are no jobs there and, generally, nothing much there, should look how much employment there actually is in the "megazone" along the subway route. Yeah, obviously today that's almost entirely low-rise business park but it still shows you there's a lot of potential to harness.

 

[44 North]

I don't disagree. Just look at how little development has occurred on the Bloor-Danforth line BECAUSE it went through stable neighbourhoods. It'll be much easier to get densities built in these empty fields than near a good chunck of the Eglinton Crosstown's route (*cough* Forest Hill *cough* North Toronto *Cough* Leaside *cough*). But only time will tell us if people want to live in these areas which will dictate development growth.

Agreed that it's easy to question the Crosstown's tunnel (10km!) when much of it is through lowrise residential - and will probably remain that way forever. Or that it IMO leapfrogged other longstanding crosstown projects (*cough* Queen, King, waterfront). But I think it's still a step in the right direction in that it's light rail. Sure the centre tunnel is costly as all hell, but the flexibility of the mode and how it can be expanded outward is where the real cost-savings will arise. Trenched, elevated, side of road, middle of road, downtown, uptown, railway... this is why light rail is embraced worldwide. It solved the problem that plagued many cities of whether they should/could afford expanding their rail network - particularly in an expansive post-war autocentric environment. Even our province was big into the biz of trying to formulate an answer with their icts/alrt program (probably bc they realized they couldn't afford to pay TO's laundry list of backlogged subway projects).

TYSSE on the other hand is the costliest transit infrastructure in existence (deep bore heavy rail), with much of it built in an environment where it defies logic to do so (fields and highways). That northernmost 2km...there really is nowhere else on our subway system like it, and I think you'd be hard-pressed to find anywhere in this half of the globe that built something similar in such a place. One billion that cost, with no affordable options explored and no BCA given. At Hwy 7 there were no residents for a 2km radius that could've opposed open-air sections. Everything about it is unprecedented, and I don't think we'll see anything similar in the future.

Long and short I doubt there's anybody on this site who opposes building over parking lots, or not expanding transit. What many do seem to oppose is squandering scarce capital on questionable/costly projects, while leaving other areas high and dry. I haven't read the report that TJ posted above, but I think it will show that connecting suburban 'megazones' with transit is the right move. What I doubt however is it showing that deep bore heavy rail is the right way to do it.

 

[Forgotten]

A company like KPMG?
http://urbantoronto.ca/database/projects/kpmg-vaughan

It'll take some time, no doubt, but they should be able to attract some marquee employers, just like Markham Centre has. Speaking of which, I don't see anyone here commenting on the report Neptis put out today. People who think there are no jobs there and, generally, nothing much there, should look how much employment there actually is in the "megazone" along the subway route. Yeah, obviously today that's almost entirely low-rise business park but it still shows you there's a lot of potential to harness.

It speaks volumes when the City of Vaughan wouldn't do it.

Low rise business parks just means you're about 20 football fields away from work once you get out of the Metropolitan or Highway 407 station.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

It speaks volumes when the City of Vaughan wouldn't do it.

Low rise business parks just means you're about 20 football fields away from work once you get out of the Metropolitan or Highway 407 station.

Vaughan wouldn't do what? I'm not sure what you're referencing. Anyway, I'm not pro-business park. They're terrible and that's a terrible area for them. I was merely pointing out that the "Subway to Nowhere" is actually going through a huge jobs hub. There's no reason to think that with a subway we won't see redevelopment of those areas.

I know 44North's issues with heavy rail but, really, that ship has sailed. I think the subway could have run above ground at least from Steeles to 407 but you certainly wouldn't have it above ground through the university or through VMC. The two other caveats are that there was a plan for LRT along Jane Street and because of how that stretch of road is, it would hardly benefit from the street life LRT can create anyway. The reality of this line is that the redevelopment opportunities are at VMC and Steeles West, to a degree. The 407 station wasn't designed for that and the route between stations is largely bleak.

Yeah, it's unprecedented to bring a subway up to a suburban greenfield and build a downtown but I'm OK with that. Because what IS "precedented" up the wazoo is building crappy sprawl and more business parks in Vaughan. Vaughan's always gonna be Vaughan but if they have a chance to pull off VMC I think the prospects are clearly better with a subway than something lesser. Trying something unprecedented is better than repeating the same reliable mistakes we made for 60 years.

 

[BMO]

...TYSSE on the other hand is the costliest transit infrastructure in existence (deep bore heavy rail), with much of it built in an environment where it defies logic to do so (fields and highways). That northernmost 2km...there really is nowhere else on our subway system like it, and I think you'd be hard-pressed to find anywhere in this half of the globe that built something similar in such a place. One billion that cost, with no affordable options explored and no BCA given. At Hwy 7 there were no residents for a 2km radius that could've opposed open-air sections. Everything about it is unprecedented, and I don't think we'll see anything similar in the future....

Mirabel Airport in Montreal

Ah c'mon man look at Dubai, look at Brasilia stop acting like this is one of a kind thing. it's got relatively decent anchors on the line irrespective of what it passes through. People wanted a subway through the Port Lands yet I don't see any residents living there? I don't see development being done there? How do you justify that and not justify this when it too has a masterplan for VMC? Because it's in Toronto? Because it's on the water? It's really not a crazy idea to build transit before development or even *gasp* in conjunction with development. The line is being built the only thing we can do now is encourage more development to prevent it from failing. No point complaining about how it's nowhere near residents. In my experience Jobs tend to create more trips than residential areas in suburban areas anyway.

 

[ehlow]

Parts of central Eglinton where the tunnel is are relatively dense (midrise apartments, shops and offices).

Several parts are ripe for development, like the areas south east of Laird, areas around Don Mills station etc.

Also even though parts of the Bloor line aren't filled with high rise buildings, it still has very good ridership.

 

[BMO]

Parts of central Eglinton where the tunnel is are relatively dense (midrise apartments, shops and offices).

Several parts are ripe for development, like the areas south east of Laird, areas around Don Mills station etc.

Also even though parts of the Bloor line aren't filled with high rise buildings, it still has very good ridership.

it's because the entire TTC subway system essentially funnels people onto the lines with buses and other forms of surface transit. I was being facetious when I commented about Eglinton, but It's still a valid point that there are huge swaths of Eglinton Crosstown that aren't likely to use Transit due to the demographics. That doesn't mean the entire line shouldn't be built or that it shouldn't go underground. I was just pointing it out. The majority of TTC's ridership uses a Bus daily to access the subway so this idea that a subway station must be within walking distance to generate all it's ridership is false.

 

[44 North]

Mirabel Airport in Montreal

Ah c'mon man look at Dubai, look at Brasilia stop acting like this is one of a kind thing. it's got relatively decent anchors on the line irrespective of what it passes through. People wanted a subway through the Port Lands yet I don't see any residents living there? I don't see development being done there? How do you justify that and not justify this when it too has a masterplan for VMC? Because it's in Toronto? Because it's on the water? It's really not a crazy idea to build transit before development or even *gasp* in conjunction with development. The line is being built the only thing we can do now is encourage more development to prevent it from failing. No point complaining about how it's nowhere near residents. In my experience Jobs tend to create more trips than residential areas in suburban areas anyway.

AFAIK Dubai is big into open air metros, supplemented with light rail. Quick wiki says ditto for Brasilia. Dunno about proposals to run any subways into the Port Lands. Everything I've see has been lower cost solutions, and even lower cost downgrades. This seems to support the notion that deep bore heavy rail through an environment like south Vaughan is unprecedented for TO, and rather unique for much of the globe.

Again, nobody is opposed to transit building or redevelopment. They're opposed to using scarce dollars for the utmost expensive solutions, and/or the leapfrogging of longstanding priorities. Construction and financing of this extension isn't over, and the reverberations of the precedence - and Qs as to why we can't build something similar elsewhere (say, in Scarb) - will undoubtedly continue for generations.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

Vaughan wouldn't do what? I'm not sure what you're referencing. Anyway, I'm not pro-business park. They're terrible and that's a terrible area for them. I was merely pointing out that the "Subway to Nowhere" is actually going through a huge jobs hub. There's no reason to think that with a subway we won't see redevelopment of those areas.

I know 44North's issues with heavy rail but, really, that ship has sailed. I think the subway could have run above ground at least from Steeles to 407 but you certainly wouldn't have it above ground through the university or through VMC. The two other caveats are that there was a plan for LRT along Jane Street and because of how that stretch of road is, it would hardly benefit from the street life LRT can create anyway. The reality of this line is that the redevelopment opportunities are at VMC and Steeles West, to a degree. The 407 station wasn't designed for that and the route between stations is largely bleak.

Yeah, it's unprecedented to bring a subway up to a suburban greenfield and build a downtown but I'm OK with that. Because what IS "precedented" up the wazoo is building crappy sprawl and more business parks in Vaughan. Vaughan's always gonna be Vaughan but if they have a chance to pull off VMC I think the prospects are clearly better with a subway than something lesser. Trying something unprecedented is better than repeating the same reliable mistakes we made for 60 years.

I think what he was referring to was that Vaughan wouldn't set up it's hosiptal, or new City Hall here. There's an element out there that feels that the lack of willingness by the city to develop here represents a lack of investment or commitment to the plan. Especially considering the ancillary business that would pop up around a hospital or city hall.

I tend to be on that side