Mr.Tang
Active Member
well said...
- Thread starter 299 bloor call control.
- Start date
well said...
TJ O'Pootertoot
Senior Member
I am more than familiar with all the numbers, including the region's current $2b+ debt and the fact their southern municipalities (particularly Markham) are AHEAD of the growth projections. The province's revised 2031 numbers (Amendment 2 to Places to Grow) similarly skewed upwards. "Documents and studies" is rather vague so I'm not sure what bloodbath you're envisioning. Financial? Real estate? Low ridership?
City Hall is a total red herring though I might have moved it there, if I had my druthers. They stuck with the location they'd had since the 70s and so what? City Hall is hardly crucial to a thriving transit-oriented centre. Markham Centre is pretty close to the civic centre (technically it's in the UGC, but it's not central) but the planned York U campus and even the thankfully aborted arena are more significant sites. Neither Langstaff Gateway nor Richmond Hill Centre nor Newmarket Centre are civic centres and I'm not going to look at all 20+ UGCs but I doubt very many are civic centres so I guess what I'm saying is, what's your point?
Hey, fair enough. I respectfully disagree with many people here (and agree with many people here); 44Northis just kind of special. "Northy" is just faster to type and I can live with "Pootie," since it's not really the name my mom gave me but I'm happy to try being more respectful.
Yeah, I'm trying to hope Vaughan can show everyone what they can do. Doesn't mean I'm not skeptical but those "initial signs" you point to aren't really "initial signs" as much as "present conditions." We all know, and have known for years, that it's a "subway to nowhere." The question is whether Vaughan can make into somewhere - that's the whole premise not just of this subway but of the entire plan, at least when it comes to suburbs - and pointing out there's still a WalMart and only one 14-storey office tower there -before the subway has even opened!- is not a constructive analysis, IMHO. Instead of focusing on what's not there, one could look at the investments by major corporations by KPMG and Smart Centres and say, "It's early days, maybe this thing has a chance of working," instead of taking a picture on a random day in 2015 and thinking it is remotely indicative of what 2031 could look like.
guste
New Member
True enough... I won't speak for 44North, but as far as I'm concerned, it's tough to see the DRL get pushed down the road, while Sorbara and Flaherty do what they do. It's important to question what the experts recommend, but there is a definite arrogance in disregarding them and pushing projects through that are less pressing.
All that said, I'm really excited about the new extension, just from a perspective of loving to see more transit built. Best to make the most of our current situation, than to repeatedly prosecute those who brought us to this point. The idealistic portion of me just hopes that this opens the eyes of more people. Everyone needs to know how the sausage is made. Eyes wide open.
Rainforest
Senior Member
Target wasted investor's money, not tax money. Not my problem
Btw, I am not saying that we can do without the government and its tax-funded projects. Certain areas can only be funded via that mechanism.
M II A II R II K
Senior Member
The extension could be more useful if it got extended to Canada's Wonderland via Vaughn Mills.
nfitz
Superstar
Given how low the projected ridership is north of Steeles, how does heading north of 7, into even lower densities help?
WislaHD
Superstar
That extension would be the equivalent of tunneling from the waterfront to St. Clair Ave.
Would it be possible to run the subway above ground from HWY-7 to Canada's Wonderland/Major Mac?
Would it be possible to run the subway above ground from HWY-7 to Canada's Wonderland/Major Mac?
M II A II R II K
Senior Member
The station could also be part of one of the rides.
TJ O'Pootertoot
Senior Member
In theory you probably could but, really, it couldn't be worth the costs, especially for how few days Wonderland is open.
Of course, the initial idea was to have an extension of the Jane LRT running on the road; that would have served Wonderland and Vaughan Mills really well. You can't justify the subway north of 7 but if you're coming from down south, taking the subway up to VMC and then a shuttle bus to Wonderland should be a pretty efficient trip.
WislaHD
Superstar
I don't know, an LRT serving what is essentially a business park with very little residential areas nearby?
A BRT or even just an express bus with two destinations (Vaughan Mills and Canada's Wonderland) should be sufficient.
A BRT or even just an express bus with two destinations (Vaughan Mills and Canada's Wonderland) should be sufficient.
44 North
Senior Member
You’re right that Vaughan is sprawly. They’ve seemingly been speeding up outward growth - which is why I find it irksome that this subway hasn’t spurred more proposals for infill along arterials or a scattering of low/midrise projects in the periphery. There’s been ample time and space to see incremental changes, and I’m not talking about just in the immediate vicinity of the subway. Obviously there are numerous ways of putting to use smart planning than building a cbd.
And the T (transit) is there. Sure it’s news that it’s been delayed, but by all accounts it was to open this year. We’ve all seen major developments – even entire communities - move along faster elsewhere. This is a lot of money that taxpayers have shelled out here. Not to mention TYSSE is the first subway project in 15yrs, numerous other projects have been ignored / changed / delayed indefinitely, and we have an admission by Sorbara that this was a pork barrel.
And I never made those claims about growth and connecting nodes. Quite the opposite, actually. I support urbanization, and I support grade-separated rapid transit - as you’re clearly aware from continually referring to my preference for light rail and RER in place of certain subways.
What I do have a problem with is the Prov selectively ignoring light RT and RER when it suits them; pushing through certain transportation projects using the costliest mode (that, again, results in the ignoring / delaying / dropping of numerous other priorities and promises); ID’ing a "regional node" in what amounts to some vacant lots (seemingly because it conveniently works as part of an admitted political backroom deal); ignoring other nodes that have actually grown significantly and are clearly transit-starved; and their turning a blind eye to the continued sprawl by municipalities – despite the fact that P2G is in place.
It’s all well and good to tout the benefits of UGCs, the Big Move, and "the future". But when much of these plans have been pushed aside, with numerous promises for changes by 2031 rendered void - all the while one site which only really exists on paper gets the highest echelon of transportation infrastructure – it’s a bit hard to see these benefits.
TJ O'Pootertoot
Senior Member
Yeah, that's pretty much what I said; I forget how far north the LRT was going to run. There are also some condos up around there now but I don't think that Jane Street is really primed for streetfront redevelopment or the kind of better environment an LRT can create. Vaughan Mills is a year-round hub but even so, a seasonal bus shuttle from the VMC terminal should be sufficient...and for the long term.
I don't think SPEEDING UP is accurate; Vaughan's 2015 outward growth isn't like 2005 or 1995. But, as I think I said upthread, I do agree they haven't slammed the brakes on it as hard as I'd like. They opened up new whitebelt lands whereas I think they could have been more aggressive with the VMC targets and more reluctant to open new land until we've seen how that goes. There is infill along arterials just outside the centre, at Weston/7 but, as pointed out above, Jane Street is largely industrial park that won't go anywhere and the 407 is a barrier to the south. That said, there's still a lot of land - both still greenfield and ready for replacement - within the UGC.
(And as with my point above, one benefit of LRT over subway is the streetscape it can create. That would have had no effect on Jane between Steeles and 7.)
Like where? Again, the prime sites are right by the station box. I admit I'm a bit surprised the land on the south side of 7 (north of Interchange) hasn't startedup yet, but I'm certainly not concerned that it will. Again, consider the timelines: The UGC was designated in 2006 but that was a meaningless dot on a map until the zoning was put in place and that was less than 5 years ago. (Plus there was a whole deal with Toromont and their desire to move that pushed back the schedule on their lands. I can't remember when they're supposed to finally head north.)
I agree with the general principle and I think we've both said before the overall system of project prioritization and funding is messed-up. The mode, at least in this case, is really a red herring as the subway to York U was being discussed for a long time. Sorbara just got it to come further north. The node's location also strikes me as irrelevant. Yes, it's (partly) a "vacant lot" but it's not some random spot in Caledon. It is just barely north of Toronto in one of the country's fastest growing municipalities -- a municipality that needed incentive to intensify -- and it is one of 3 growth centres aligned along a major east-west corridor. (obviously, this all applies as well to Langstaff/RHC).
If you're going to question the designation of VMC, you're basically questioning any UGC that's not an established centre (be it downtown Toronto, NYCC, downtown Oshawa, or wherever). Part of the point of P2G was to bring high order transit (LRT, in some cases!) to "vacant lots" in suburbs and build something sustainable there. You seem to have issues with the idea this could work out and, like I said, it's a legit opinion. I still think it's a smart move and Yonge/7 and Jane/7 have very strong potential to work.
Fact is, VMC is undeveloped but it's not nowhere and if they were going to porkfully drive a subway up there, it remains laudable to they tied that into a larger transportation network and growth plan. While I once again think Vaughan could have been even more ambitious than they have been, they're also not taking the "highest-echelon" gift they've been given for granted and should be given credit for that.
Indeed, one could say these things are fundamental to the point of having a planning profession in the first place!
You're tying together cause and effect too neatly. I totally agree plans get undermined and pushed aside and there are all sorts of ways in which opportunities are being missed. But THIS project didn't push anything back in any concrete way. It's easy to make that point with Scarborough because:
a) they very specifically passed up a fully-funded LRT for an unfunded subway
b) they did this at the same time they were talking about the DRL
If SmartTrack gets approved, it won't be much less of a "pork" move by Tory, except that he was piggbacking on a provincial RER plan.
[See - we were both so civilized!)
Rainforest
Senior Member
A median BRT should fit Jane street very well, the right-of-way is wide there. It could serve as a trunk for some of the east-west routes, or their branches, that will turn to Jane and go south to the subway terminus.
TJ O'Pootertoot
Senior Member
The way traffic is on Jane these days, the median probably isn't even needed in the short term; just an HOV lane (especially if we're talking about serving the mall and theme park, which are busiest on weekends).
I'm even going to throw 44North a bone and say that (unlike Langstaff, which is atop Yonge Street) I think it may well have been sensible to just take the subway up to York U and run an LRT north up Jane Street (assuming you were going to go up to somewhere like Major Mack; a Steeles-7 LRT seems wasteful to me). I can't travel back in time and say for sure, but it at least seems something worthy of consideration.
But, in addition to the politics and other things that interfere, there is also timing. The way Transit City and this project and Move2020 and The Big Move all unfolded, that probably couldn't have happened. In the meantime, like I said, I'm hoping Vaughan will stick to its guns and show the doubters they can make it work. Nobody wins if they can't.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
I don't agree at all that Toronto's rapid transit system is under developed.
This will depend on how you want to define "developed". I define it as having the infrastructure in place to get the job done.
If that is the definition we're using, then Toronto's RT system is arguably overdeveloped since the introduction of the Sheppard Subway. I don't see any corridors in Toronto that need to be served by rapid transit that aren't already. Sure, there are corridors where it would be nice to have (DRL and Scarborough, for example), but none where it is necessary.
It should be noted that the TTC's current deficiencies aren't necessarily because of a lack of capital investment. What the TTC needs is more ongoing investment into keeping the system in a state-of-good-repair and general operations. If the TTC budget were improved, I suspect that most customer complaints would be addressed. Haphazardly investing capital into expensive rapid transit projects, without improving the budget won't do much to improve the status quo. All the fancy subway proposals won't mean much if the busses taking people to those subways are at crush load and unreliable - this is something that will become evident if the Line 2 extension is ever completed.
Unfortunately, busses and investing into TTC operations aren't very sexy, so politicians don't like talking about it very much.
Please keep in mind that I'm not pooh poohing all rapid transit expansions. While these investments will present fantastic improvements to our system, their importance has been wildly overstated by the public. We'd get a lot more value on our dollars invested if more dollars went to improving TTC operations.
Last edited: