[Midtown Urbanist]

Seems to me we need to start building, period.

Agreed. Both camps here are unified in the idea that both Yonge North and the Relief Line to Sheppard needs to be built.

The problem is the province and federal government. They won't fund the essential transit needed for the country's most important city-region, and as a result we have resorted to this bickering between municipalities.

Other city-regions of Toronto's size have access to direct funding from other level of governments to fund transit, in the order of tens of billions. Or they have revenue tools to levy. The TTC is the least subsidized transit agency of a major North American city. Further, Canada is the only country in the entire G20 that does not have a dedicated transit fund at the federal level.

We need real changes in the way we fund transit in this region.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

The Yonge Line can't be extended to Steeles because it will presumably exasperate the Yonge capacity crisis. Same reason it can't be extneded into York region.

I would wager that extending it to Steeles would simply make the commutes of existing riders easier. Extending it to York Region is where we capture most of the new riders.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

The Yonge Line can't be extended to Steeles because it will presumably exasperate the Yonge capacity crisis. Same reason it can't be extneded into York region.

And that's why we have to stop building transit; because that will stop people from getting on it elsewhere anyway.

And no garbage permitted to leave Toronto. The Toronto Zoo converted into large landfill/incinerator

Well, now that's probably unworkable because of Rouge Park.
But surely it's logical that any 905 visitor to an attraction subsidized by the Toronto taxpayer (e.g. the zoo, the ferry) should not be allowed in until 416 residents have been accommodated. Capacity being finite and all.

I don't agree with the we-they mentality expressed in this thread, but it does seem like there are two camps and there is one difference
- People in Toronto want to live close to where they work and want transit to span the gap
- People in Richmond hill want to live further from where they work and want transit to span the gap

I think that's a simplification. There are jobs in the suburbs, lots of them. And public policy is to promote more jobs in the suburbs. It's also not only about jobs because, per the posts above, 905ers go to shows and games and restaurants in 416 and vice versa.

Yes, the paradox of transit (especially GO) is that it allows you to live further from where you work but you'd think, 35 years after GO was created, people in 416 would appreciate the benefits that brings to the "local" economy.

And I don't think suburban nodes have "fallen out of favour." I think the private market and public policy disprove that. I think clearly there are challenges fostering the sheer volume of jobs we want to see in those centres, but the mixed success of plans from 30 years ago (ie NYCC and Scarborough) doesn't mean 2010 plans won't work.

But I agree there has to be a larger policy shift. Places to Grow and the Greenbelt are huge parts of that shift. So is inclusionary zoning, announced today. So too would revenue tools be, if they were introduced. So too is development charge reform. Metrolinx, for example, had a white paper showing how DC discounts could be used to encourage growth in mobility hubs. We have a good start, but we're not there yet.

I have avoided making a reference to Mr Creosote and the Razor Thin Chocolate Wafer, because that skit is a bit gross

Tis -but a classic.
Lord knows this thread could use some Monty Python. It's hugely unfair you didn't just link to it, so I will, as long as we agree that the Yonge Extension isn't the wafer
And we need to start building, yes.

 

[Canadian Chocho]

It's so clear people just want the 905 to fail, which is where they are basing their opinions. Despite being raised in the suburbs and currently living there, I agree that is it a shame that the region expanded so much and developed on farmland etc...

But this has already been a reality for decades. I thought we were all hoping to intensify what has already been swallowed by the urban region to stop further sprawl, not neglect its newest fringes. I think some fetishize about all of the 905 moving into the 416 and Peel, York, and Durham Regions magically become farmland and forest overnight.

I'm all for downtown boosting, but taking such a spiteful stance on growth in the region is just not constructive.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

And I don't think suburban nodes have "fallen out of favour." I think the private market and public policy disprove that. I think clearly there are challenges fostering the sheer volume of jobs we want to see in those centres, but the mixed success of plans from 30 years ago (ie NYCC and Scarborough) doesn't mean 2010 plans won't work.

You know, we have a saying back in Texas, probably in Tennessee too, but I know in Texas, that goes... Fool me once, shame... Shame on you, but fool me once, and I ain't gon' get fooled again.

We've been grossly overestimating the gross of these centres for years. Expecting the same densities as the Financial District along Yonge North is madness

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

GWB quotes and Monty Python.
This thread may get fun yet!

It's actually worth noting, RHC has a 1:1 jobs/residents split. Langstaff's is...trying to remember...more like 1:3? or 1:2? Anyway, RH was not happy with Markham not aiming for a 1:1 split but people concerned about jobs in the suburban nodes should be happy that Markham is betting more heavily on residential, FWIW.

 

[minilude]

not to hijack the thread... but I would like to praise Markham for it's history of attracting developments. Been to the new “downtown Markham" recently it feels booming. Can't believe everything there was built from scratch. The so-called Langstaff gateway is actually a Markham land parcel.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I would wager that extending it to Steeles would simply make the commutes of existing riders easier. Extending it to York Region is where we capture most of the new riders.

Intuitively, I suspect you're right. Modal split for downtown-bound trips around the region is generally a decent proxy for estimating the potential of enhanced transit services to attract new ridership. I know the modal split along the entire Finch/Steeles East corridors for trips to PD1 is already very high, indicating the extension to Steeles wouldn't generate new users.

I wouldn't be opposed to an extension to Steeles being modelled, but until we have more data I'll continue to oppose the Steeles proposal until solutions are in place for downstream crowding.

 

[jaycola]

Those blaming suburban residents for not living closer to work need to keep in mind a few things.
If one partner works in the city and the other in the suburbs (as with my family), does it more sense to live in the city or the burbs?
If you change jobs either through choice or circumstances, should you also relocate your home? That is a very costly prospect.
How about those service industry employees who could only dream about living in the city based on their income. should they quit their jobs because of transit congestion?
Let's just be happy that people have jobs and do our best to get them there efficiently, let's not scold them for living where they do.

 

[44 North]

Unofficial.
Hypothetical.
Hugely long-term.

Toronto envisioned a subway loop at Steeles 30 years ago. Do you see it? Then why are you assuming there's any relevance to a subway at Major Mac 30 years from now?
It's a bit of interesting context, in terms of where YR/Vaughan want to go. I actually quite sincerely thank you for bringing it to light, in that context - I don't think I'd seen it until you mentioned it.

But it's a red herring when it comes to the planning for a line from Finch to Highway 7, which is all that is officially under consideration in this thread and everywhere else.

Similarly, you like citing Calthorpe's PRT system for Langstaff which, no doubt, is very pie in the sky. It's also a full-build out concept you keep citing as if it's the backbone of the plan. It effectively boils down to automated cars, which by 2041/51 may well seem rather less far-fetched and likely render the PRT itself obsolete before it comes close to reality. On the one hand you readily admit that priorities shift and plans change but with the other you keep wielding the most far-fetched elements of a given long-term plan to prove its lack of immediate-term consequence.

And that Steeles subway loop even had an EA completed and was 'officially under consideration'. Yet what happened? We changed plans, then decided to terminate at some fields and industrial lots elsewhere. And a subway from Finch-RHC was envisioned to be in operation this year. Do you see it? Construction has yet to start, and may not for some time. So I don't consider it a "red herring" to think plans and priorities could change - whether official, long-term, or pie-in-the sky. If anything is a red herring, it's your utter denial that any plan can change when we know they often do. The world didn't begin in the 2000's, and McGuinty's golden hand never descended down from the firmament to carve the Big Move in stone.

*On that note, I don't see the need to incessantly prattle on about Us vs Them, Them vs Us, 905 vs 416 rhetoric. Or falsely paint people as anti-transit, anti-development, anti-subway, anti-York Region, pro-sprawl BoogedyMen - when you know none of that is true. You're not alone in doing this, but IMO try to be the loudest voice. But I guess so long as some believe the puerile fallacies, then I guess all is okay?​

Obviously YSNE is "officially under consideration" and is a huge priority. Not doubting that. But one unfortunate thing to consider is this situation is that "priority" can be a bit contextually ambiguous. With the exception of last week's updated and re-updated plan, I can't say I've seen YSNE officially acknowledged in any of Toronto's Top 5 or 10 transit priorities over the last few years. Whereas in York Region it's considered priority #1. Maybe YNSE construction can start next year, maybe in a decade. But could this delay and schismatic lack of interregional agreement on priorities foster some kind of interim plan, phased building, focus on RER, or a back-to-the-drawing-board plan? I'd say all of the above are distinct and logical possibilities.

Similarly, you like citing Calthorpe's PRT system for Langstaff which, no doubt, is very pie in the sky. It's also a full-build out concept you keep citing as if it's the backbone of the plan. It effectively boils down to automated cars, which by 2041/51 may well seem rather less far-fetched and likely render the PRT itself obsolete before it comes close to reality. On the one hand you readily admit that priorities shift and plans change but with the other you keep wielding the most far-fetched elements of a given long-term plan to prove its lack of immediate-term consequence.

Aw, I hope Calthorpre's PRT doesn't boil-down to automated cars or shuttle bues. Thaty'd definitely be a disappointment. Was very much looking forward to riding around Langstaff Gateway on a pod conveyance systsem.

The connecting feeder routes justify extension to at least Steeles. The Steeles East and West bus carry 55,000 together daily and operate 77 buses during morning peak hour. This is twice the amount of the entire VIVA network and more than four times the VIVA Blue Bus down Yonge Street (16,000). Plus the development potential at Newtonbrook Plaza and Steeles Corners would be huge on it's own. (And IMO is a lot more promising/realistic than Hwy-7/Yonge)

Regionally, if there were no municipal borders, extending it to just Steeles makes a lot of sense for the interim. This will never happen though because we do have a municipal border and it would appear as a slight to the lucrative voting district known as York Region.

Exactly. Lots of evidence points to that being a logical option, or at least being a possible phased/interim approach. But apparently it's sacrilege to talk about it. I've seen you and other pro-YNSE posters get labeled some nasty things for saying how a DRL should start or be in place prior to YNSE's construction - even after explicitly stating your support for an extension to RHC.

You go away for a couple weeks and this thread grows by 25 pages.

Reviewing what was said, very little new was added to the conversation and the opposing sides of the debate appear now only more entrenched in their positions than before but the rhetoric appears more nasty.
To sum up what I gathered from skimming over the pages, for opponents, York Region in is seen as freeloading, selfish and ignorant in it's quest to improve transit along the Yonge corridor because of capacity issues further down the line. York's development plan in itself is part of the problem because so much of the planned development will as a matter of course only add further strain to what is unquestionably an already overburdened line.

York for it's part is looking at the provincial requirement to contain the urban boundary and to focus development towards high density, transit integrated urban neighbourhoods and is planning in a matter consistent with "Places to Grow" which they are expected to do.

I do believe both sides of the debate have valid arguments but York's ability to manage growth and urbanize is dependent upon growth in the Yonge corridor. The bulk of remaining land available to York Region for development is, due to the constraints of the "Green Belt", essentially a 5-7 km wide swath centred on Yonge street with Bathurst for the most part being the western edge of development. Similarly if we look at the traffic density and retail density in the images below, life in York Region is without a doubt centred on Yonge Street.

Simply put for York Region in general, the best opportunity for creating urban densities and walkable, transit focused neighbourhoods is for this to occur along Yonge street. Needless to say, any transit improvements connecting York residents to Yonge will put added pressure on the already overburdened line but if not there than where?

"Regional Official Plan
With a population of 1,156,186 residents as of June 30, 2015, The Regional Municipality of York is the third-largest municipality in Ontario and the sixth-largest in Canada. Ranked as Canada’s fastest-growing large municipality, York Region will continue to expand rapidly over the coming decades. York Region is forecast to reach 1,790,000 residents and 900,000 jobs by 2041." http://tinyurl.com/gpsrmj4

Much of this is true. It's a huge area, and no doubt is growing rapidly with there being latent preexisting demand for transit and great attempts made at urbanization. But looking at the map you posted (and the knowing the big picture in general), it's pretty clear that York Region will continue sprawling outward - whether on designated land, or unprotected countryside, or beyond. Sure we can hear Wayne Emmerson or other pols spout the usual pieties about smart growth and TOD. But what could (could, not will) develop at RHC/LG with a subway extn pales in comparison to the big picture. Sure there's "2,500 bus trips per day on Yonge". But that doesn't tell us much. North of Steeles, Yonge is like the 30th busiest surface transit corridor in the GTHA. Compound this with YR's continued outward expansion (and the inevitable infrastructure required), abysmal existing ridership, and preexisting pop/density in the Centres today...seems to me this 5km piece of subway is somewhat of a gamble. A really extension one that will come at the expense of many other projects.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Those blaming suburban residents for not living closer to work need to keep in mind a few things.
If one partner works in the city and the other in the suburbs (as with my family), does it more sense to live in the city or the burbs?
If you change jobs either through choice or circumstances, should you also relocate your home? That is a very costly prospect.
How about those service industry employees who could only dream about living in the city based on their income. should they quit their jobs because of transit congestion?
Let's just be happy that people have jobs and do our best to get them there efficiently, let's not scold them for living where they do.

Well, that's all fine and good but what about CAPACITY and people at Rosedale station who can't tough out the 3-stop ride downtown because it's so busy???

So I don't consider it a "red herring" to think plans and priorities could change - whether official, long-term, or pie-in-the sky. If anything is a red herring, it's your utter denial that any plan can change when we know they often do. The world didn't begin in the 2000's, and McGuinty's golden hand never descended down from the firmament to carve the Big Move in stone.

Either we're talking past ourselves or you sincerely don't get it. I've said 100 times that obviously plans change.
What you can't bend your head around is that, precisely because of this fact, no one gives a crap about what York Region unofficially has in a 2041 "plan."
Because it's not remotely near reality, because it's not yet in any official plan and because PLANS CHANGE, no one cares about a hypothetical subway loop at Major Mac, except you, particularly in relation to the pros/cons of a subway to RHC.
See?

I can't say I've seen YSNE officially acknowledged in any of Toronto's Top 5 or 10 transit priorities over the last few years. Whereas in York Region it's considered priority #1. Maybe YNSE construction can start next year, maybe in a decade..

Seriously? It was just in their map last week!! Jaycola wasn't kidding when he said the same points keep getting made over and over again . Fine - I'll post it again:

Top 10. End of story. Now you've seen it and can move on to the next phase of your life. Congratulations!

It's a yellow SUBWAY , and everything! That's my new wallpaper. Not just for my desktop; for my living room.

Of course, plans change...

Aw, I hope Calthorpre's PRT doesn't boil-down to automated cars or shuttle bues. Thaty'd definitely be a disappointment. Was very much looking forward to riding around Langstaff Gateway on a pod conveyance systsem.

something we agree on I liked the Jetsons aspects of it, dammit.

Anyway, I get all the factors you list - I don't see it as remotely a gamble. I've probably said it before but if someone offered me 5 acres to sit on in Scarborough Centre, Misissauaga Centre, LG/RHC or up in the whitebelt of York Region, I'd take LG/RHC in a second. Centrally located, transit-oriented...it's a potential goldmine. YR's outward expansion is already a known quantity, for the next generation. But it's also not mutually exclusive. Markham wants to keep 60% of its population within the built boundary and they cannot do it without a subway (FINE - or metrorail or possibly-but-doubtfully an LRT; definitely not with RER-only). If you can't intensify on Yonge, particularly on this stretch, you're not going to pull it off on the fringes. And if you're not even going to try on Yonge, there's no point complaining about outward growth as if you did.

(Also, there is very little whitebelt land left; a bit in Markham, a bit in Vaughan and more in East Gwillimbury. Yes, there are some already-approved lands on the fringe that are not developed yet but 69% of York Region is the greenbelt. Its "outward growth" is very finite and constrained.)

YR is doing what the law requires, and more than most - RH, V and Markham are all aiming about the provincial intensification minimum when almost no one else is. You can take advantage of that and milk it or you can go, "Weeellll, it's only the 30th-busiest bus corridor and it's kind of a gamble, I don't really know...."

I don't want to quote Yoda, so I'll just paraphrase that you're either trying to do this intensification-on-transit-corridors thing or you're not. And if you're not doing it here, you're not doing it anywhere else.

 

[BMO]

Those blaming suburban residents for not living closer to work need to keep in mind a few things.
If one partner works in the city and the other in the suburbs (as with my family), does it more sense to live in the city or the burbs?
If you change jobs either through choice or circumstances, should you also relocate your home? That is a very costly prospect.
How about those service industry employees who could only dream about living in the city based on their income. should they quit their jobs because of transit congestion?
Let's just be happy that people have jobs and do our best to get them there efficiently, let's not scold them for living where they do.

What are you talking about? Ofcourse choosing to live in the suburbs due to circumstances outside of your control automatically makes you a Hummer-loving car-driver who only wants to extend the subway because you think you deserve one.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Those blaming suburban residents for not living closer to work need to keep in mind a few things.
If one partner works in the city and the other in the suburbs (as with my family), does it more sense to live in the city or the burbs?
If you change jobs either through choice or circumstances, should you also relocate your home? That is a very costly prospect.
How about those service industry employees who could only dream about living in the city based on their income. should they quit their jobs because of transit congestion?
Let's just be happy that people have jobs and do our best to get them there efficiently, let's not scold them for living where they do.

Who the heck has been blaming people for living in the suburbs?

 

[BMO]

Much of this is true. It's a huge area, and no doubt is growing rapidly with there being latent preexisting demand for transit and great attempts made at urbanization. But looking at the map you posted (and the knowing the big picture in general), it's pretty clear that York Region will continue sprawling outward - whether on designated land, or unprotected countryside, or beyond. Sure we can hear Wayne Emmerson or other pols spout the usual pieties about smart growth and TOD. But what could (could, not will) develop at RHC/LG with a subway extn pales in comparison to the big picture. Sure there's "2,500 bus trips per day on Yonge". But that doesn't tell us much. North of Steeles, Yonge is like the 30th busiest surface transit corridor in the GTHA. Compound this with YR's continued outward expansion (and the inevitable infrastructure required), abysmal existing ridership, and preexisting pop/density in the Centres today...seems to me this 5km piece of subway is somewhat of a gamble. A really extension one that will come at the expense of many other projects.

View attachment 69887
View attachment 69888

Those figures are people and jobs per hectare, which is a fair thing to look at but I would question whether that's a fair comparison when most of these suburban multi-modal hubs projections and growth hinges on transit. So while Peterborough's downtown may have more people and jobs per hectare than RHC in 2011, the upswing on any transit expansion in RHC and other suburban centres is way, waaaaaaaaaaaay more than what these graphics would lead one to believe. I'm not even going to mention the other urban design realities of the existing area that makes this even more obvious.

Also no idea what or where you expect growth to occur in York Region if not in these areas? The greenspace has literally run out. Growth and stuff being built today was already accounted for way back when. Maybe clarify what you mean about "York Region will continue sprawling outward".

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Who the heck has been blaming people for living in the suburbs?

Well, here's "Pman" from a couple of pages back..

I'm one of the people you mentioned. I found getting on Line 1 southbound at Rosedale in rush hour was such a misery that I gave up and drove to work downtown. I don't understand why people who live in 905 think it's their God-given right to push 416 commuters off our municipal subway system.

Except:
1. The fare the 905 riders pay had exactly nothing to do with the distance they travel;
2. The 905 riders live outside Toronto and therefore don't pay property taxes that fund so much of TTC operations; and
3. If outer suburbanites are so concerned about working downtown then they should be incented to live closer instead of in their sprawled, heavily-subsidized wasteland.

As for that bike bullshit, seriously, somebody who lives on half an acre in Richmond Hill should get a seat on a conveniently located subway while someone who lives in a densely populated area has trouble cramming onto a packed train? That's the kind of fucked up lunacy that has made transit in this region such a mess.

I think it's fair to say he is not representative of most people here. I think it's also fair to say he's not the only one with this attitude, however.

I also think BMO shows what happens when you spew out numbers and graphs with out putting them in the proper context. If you don't think Yonge north of Steeles is one the prime intensification corridors in entire province...well, I hope you're not in the real estate or policy business.