Leo_Chan said:
You can't really compare municipalities in a regional municipality to districts in a city. I would love for someone to point out the differences and similarities between the Regional Municipality of York and the City of Toronto.
Click to expand...

Scarborough is over 3x population of Richmond Hill, 2x population of Vaughan. York region promotes all of its suburbs to achieve the highest level of investment growth. Toronto not so much attention to detail and support for its suburbs. Although many downtown councilors are happy to tell them whats best

Yes there are many major differences in landscape, revitalization and growth needs between the two but the point made was that Toronto just cant work together Politically to embrace their differing needs internally which has not helped anyone's cause in this City
 
Last edited:
Seems really odd to see some DRL supporters bagging on the Tory for this move. He basically got all of York Region on board with his previous threat and has now ensured the Province doesn't get away with building the inevitable RH subway extension without the DRL. The more voices pointed at the Province to pressure for funding the better.
 
denfromoakvillemilton said:
YNSE will have less ridership then any part of the subway south of steeles, or overcrowd the yonge line. So will the 1-stop Scarborough extension. Some are for the yonge north extension and against scarborough, some are for scarborough and against yonge north. But I bet a plurality are against both.
Click to expand...

I think there are big differences between the two. Maybe too many to list. II strongly believe in suburban transit investment and I'm "against" Scarb because I think the planning process was a joke, the previous plan was better, having RT hasn't spurred development (at least at the desirable level) in STC to date and the one-stop plan (as residents are starting to realize) mostly serves to funnel people to a single point by bus. Rob Ford, the great champion ,never once used the word "intensification" because that's not why he thought it was the right thing to do.The Yonge extension is totally different. It's extending a corridor - and SSE has no corridor at all - that is already seeing the highest development in the 416 outside of downtown and Yonge/Eg. And it's extending it to a terminus where a major growth centre and planned/existing transit converge. And so on :)

This board is a bit of unique forum but I don't think most people with an opinion really know the facts or context on either.
Do a poll - even here - and ask people how far into RH the "subway to Richmond Hill" goes. I'm guessing a solid majority think it goes WAY further than it does. (Correct answer: less than 500m)

Probably because they are both low ridership vote buyers for politicians to pander to the suburbs. And let's be honest, this brawl all started with Sobara giving Vaughan a subway that it didn't deserve, while Toronto had (and still have) a ton of transit deserts.
Click to expand...

Maybe - I know that's the simple narrative. But at the end of the day, McGuinty (at least before the recession cutback) gave Toronto EVERYTHING it wanted in terms of capital projects, which was Transit City. There's no way to know what would have happened if TO had asked for the DRL but they didn't ask, so they didn't get it. YR wanted the subway(s) and it got the Vaughan line; in conjunction with Toronto's longstanding desire to have the line up to York U anyway So all this Sorbara hysteria is about a couple of KM.

I've said before and I strongly believe it: this is largely a conceptual issue. If, when the muni borders were drawn, "Metro Toronto" went up to 7 or even 16th, no one would really be quibbling about it. The issue isn't going to a low-density suburb; it's going outside Toronto to the icky 905.

They have priorities - some dictated by the province - and TO has priorities and there area also overlapping regional priorities and there just isn't a funding or governance mechanism to coordinate all that.

So asking why they are trying to serve Richmond Hill when large parts of Toronto still don't have any RT is a vaild question. I get how bad it looks to some in Scarborough that there was a big fight over what they get but YNSE is sailing through.
Click to expand...

It is valid question, when simply put. I'd tell such a person that it's because that's where the growth is, like it or not, and if we want 905 munis to build sustainable communities instead of sprawl, they need the infrastructure to do it and provincial policy says THIS is where you do it. If you can't make it work on Yonge, you're not going to make it work at STC or in Barrie etc.

(And it's 10 years since YNSE. It ain't "sailing through" anything. Maybe it seems that way, like the band that's an "overnight success" because you didn't hear about them the 10 years they were slogging it out in clubs.)

That's all IMHO, of course :)

Leo_Chan said:
You can't really compare municipalities in a regional municipality to districts in a city. I would love for someone to point out the differences and similarities between the Regional Municipality of York and the City of Toronto.
Click to expand...

Denfromoakvillemilton already pointed this out but just so it's clear: the Regional Municipality model is exactly the same as the Metro Toronto model.

The main differences now are pretty obvious:
-Toronto has COTA
-The RM's have 2 tiers, at-large councillors for each muni and, until 2018, a unelected chair

But everything YR does is basically what Metro used to do.
 
TJ O'Pootertoot said:
I think there are big differences between the two. Maybe too many to list. II strongly believe in suburban transit investment and I'm "against" Scarb because I think the planning process was a joke, the previous plan was better, having RT hasn't spurred development (at least at the desirable level) in STC to date and the one-stop plan (as residents are starting to realize) mostly serves to funnel people to a single point by bus. Rob Ford, the great champion ,never once used the word "intensification" because that's not why he thought it was the right thing to do.The Yonge extension is totally different. It's extending a corridor - and SSE has no corridor at all - that is already seeing the highest development in the 416 outside of downtown and Yonge/Eg. And it's extending it to a terminus where a major growth centre and planned/existing transit converge. And so on :)

This board is a bit of unique forum but I don't think most people with an opinion really know the facts or context on either.
Do a poll - even here - and ask people how far into RH the "subway to Richmond Hill" goes. I'm guessing a solid majority think it goes WAY further than it does. (Correct answer: less than 500m)
Click to expand...
I don't. The same promises were made for ECC, NYCC and STC in the 1980s. Look where we are now. Of course the planning process was a joke, but so was the one for Vaughan and so it goes.

Maybe - I know that's the simple narrative. But at the end of the day, McGuinty (at least before the recession cutback) gave Toronto EVERYTHING it wanted in terms of capital projects, which was Transit City. There's no way to know what would have happened if TO had asked for the DRL but they didn't ask, so they didn't get it. YR wanted the subway(s) and it got the Vaughan line; in conjunction with Toronto's longstanding desire to have the line up to York U anyway So all this Sorbara hysteria is about a couple of KM.

I've said before and I strongly believe it: this is largely a conceptual issue. If, when the muni borders were drawn, "Metro Toronto" went up to 7 or even 16th, no one would really be quibbling about it. The issue isn't going to a low-density suburb; it's going outside Toronto to the icky 905.

They have priorities - some dictated by the province - and TO has priorities and there area also overlapping regional priorities and there just isn't a funding or governance mechanism to coordinate all that.
Click to expand...
Well of course, because the icky 905 doesn't pay taxes to the city of Toronto so why aren't they using the go train like everyone else? This comes as trying to twist Toronto voters into supporting something about half of them don't want at best, because of "potential"

It is valid question, when simply put. I'd tell such a person that it's because that's where the growth is, like it or not, and if we want 905 munis to build sustainable communities instead of sprawl, they need the infrastructure to do it and provincial policy says THIS is where you do it. If you can't make it work on Yonge, you're not going to make it work at STC or in Barrie etc.

(And it's 10 years since YNSE. It ain't "sailing through" anything. Maybe it seems that way, like the band that's an "overnight success" because you didn't hear about them the 10 years they were slogging it out in clubs.)

That's all IMHO, of course :)
Click to expand...
If this is the case, why is York Region having problems with local bus service. Saying "this is where the growth is" doesn't come off as good enough when the transit service is below par, as we have bee discussing in the other thread. When this subway is built, YRT will have to increase frequencies and provide late night service, where is this money coming from. What's the point of the condos is everyone is just going to drive to Langstaff or Clark?



Denfromoakvillemilton already pointed this out but just so it's clear: the Regional Municipality model is exactly the same as the Metro Toronto model.

The main differences now are pretty obvious:
-Toronto has COTA
-The RM's have 2 tiers, at-large councillors for each muni and, until 2018, a unelected chair

But everything YR does is basically what Metro used to do.
Click to expand...
I agree with this.
 
There is no "Richmond Hill Centre" to speak of yet but once the subway is becoming a reality, yeah, I suspect they'll do that (and, a la Downsview Station) rename "Richmond Hill" to "Richmond Hill North" or something like that.

On the Markham side, "Langstaff Gateway" has been the Secondary Plan name but I suspect the condo developers won't use it. Maybe it'll be "Thornhill Heights" or some such thing. Aside from the road name, "Langstaff" probably won't last as more than a historical designation.
 
M II A II R II K said:
They should change the GO station name to Richmond Hill Centre to match the new subway station, and to avoid having 2 separate Langstaffs.
Click to expand...
Good idea. A lot of people feel that the names are a bit confusing. Langstaff GO at Langstaff Rd makes sense, but not when it's at Richmond Hill Centre Transit Terminal. And Richmond Hill GO at Major Mack does make sense (centre of Richmond Hill), but it's confusing with Richmond Hill Centre.

I propose Richmond Hill GO Station -> Major Mackenzie GO Station and Langstaff GO Station -> Richmond Hill Centre GO Station. Just don't have "formerly Richmond Hill" or formerly "Langstaff" in the name.
 
Cobra said:
I don't like how Tory didn't push harder. Relief Line isn't enough. It has to be a combo of YNSE AND Relief Long
Click to expand...

I agree it's imperative that the RL long is completed, but Tory is doing what he has to do to get the ball rolling which is more important right now. The Provincial Liberals were on the verge of buying another suburb and no tangible commitment to the RL aside from the design. Tory threatened to wage war on the RH extension and York region wanted nothing to do with that or take the risk of a back seat. The Region and City are now partnered to solidify firm commitments. If the Province wants to buy votes they have to pay Toronto as well now. To me it's best move he could have done to send a strong message heading into the elections instead of Toronto standing alone with hat in hand both the Liberal and Conservatives have to either ignore a huge voter base or get serious
 
Last edited:
I'm mixed. DRL Short + YNE versus DRL Long, DRL Long wins in my book, because the short version isn't really going to help Yonge crowding.

That said, politically this is probably the right call. The construction of the DRL Long in one go was always a long shot, and the YNE will move forward, theres too much political support for it not to. Getting the DRL Long built would be hard even if the YNE wasn't on the table. Since it is, I'd say its just not possible right now.

Ideally they'd do a DRL Medium, up to Eglinton alongside the YNE, but hopefully they can push for that after the YNE and DRL are on their way.

In all, I'd expect to see a funding commitment for both in the run up to the election, because nothing buys votes more effectively in the GTA than the words "I'll build you a subway." And if the province only gives YNE, Tory will veto it and that would look really bad on the Liberals. I'm fairly certain a firm funding commitment from the liberals would almost guarantee the construction of both lines no matter who wins the election - based on what we saw in Scarborough, the political parties seem reluctant to cancel subway projects these days since they prove popular.

But I probably shouldn't jinx it.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top