Rob Ford's Disaster of a Transit Plan

[OEincorparated]

That's why they are doing EA study to extend Yonge line to hwy 7, They need to commute further. We can meet half way though, Yonge and Steele 25km for you and 25km from me. There is a huge parking lot there.

[dleung]

Originally Posted by Me Too

I was thinking along these lines too. I was never a fan of Transit City. It just seemed like putting a grid over a map of the city without any regard for where people live or commute. Scrapping the DRL and putting in routes like Finch are what soured me on it. I wouldn't mourn its passing, except for the knowledge that it probably means that nothing will get done for the foreseeable future.

The DRL should be right up Rob Ford's alley. It is an underground subway, which he says he wants. The ridership is already there for at least the main, downtown portion. Plus, it gets streetcars off of Queen and/or King, opining up traffic for the cars taht Ford loves. IIRC the Province also wanted this line and wanted to retain it for Transit City.

Ford could counter a lot of his critics by committing to the DRL and maybe to building Eglinton (this one seems to make the most sense in terms of current ridership and it will be mostly underground).

Ford's constituents are from the suburbs. As much as he loves subways, it must be tied to his love for the suburbanites. Hence, suburban subways... Newmarket here we come...

Originally Posted by OEincorparated

Majority of the people don't live downtown anymore, why put money into something that only the few wealthy people who live downtown can use.

The DRL goes through the inner city rather than just serving downtown. It doesn't really help the rich (who a) drive, and b) whose inner-city mansions are typically a bit out of the way of most transit corridors), but rather rewards those who are willing to forgo the suburban house in favor for high-density housing right along said transit corridors.

[AndrewJM3D]

Originally Posted by OEincorparated

Majority of the people don't live downtown anymore, why put money into something that only the few wealthy people who live downtown can use.

[OEincorparated]

Nice graph Andrew, but that was 2006. Alot has changed, alot of people have moved out of the dark blue areas and into to new homees surrounding the city. You can't even call the surrounding areas of the city especially up north a suburb anymore because houses are now pretty much side by side or townhomes. It's crazy dense and condo's are poping up everywhere. Soon the 25km north od Steeles Ave, is going to have as many people as the 25km south of it. This is going to be an interesting next ten years for the city. In 20years you might see downtown, being the same as Newmarket which is considered the fringes of what is a New City Center at Yonge and Steeles.

[JustinB]

Originally Posted by OEincorparated

Nice graph Andrew, but that was 2006. Alot has changed, alot of people have moved out of the dark blue areas and into to new homees surrounding the city. You can't even call the surrounding areas of the city especially up north a suburb anymore because houses are now pretty much side by side or townhomes. It's crazy dense and condo's are poping up everywhere. Soon the 25km north od Steeles Ave, is going to have as many people as the 25km south of it. This is going to be an interesting next ten years for the city. In 20years you might see downtown, being the same as Newmarket which is considered the fringes of what is a New City Center at Yonge and Steeles.

You have not provided evidence to show the areas outside of the core are "crazy" dense. It's not hard argue to against your claims. You make a lot blanket statements, and assumption without providing evidence to back it up.

[dleung]

Well, it is true that the 905 is building some of the densest subdivisions in North America. The problem is that they're arranged in a pedestrian-hating suburban layout that is completely dependant on power centres and office parks. So no, density doesn't not necessarily translate into transit ridership potential.

[AndrewJM3D]

Originally Posted by OEincorparated

Nice graph Andrew, but that was 2006. Alot has changed, alot of people have moved out of the dark blue areas and into to new homees surrounding the city.

Okay back that up if you have more up to date data. I fail to see how over the past 4 years it has changed that much, and with most of the construction having been in the core and along Yonge it seems safe to say that the Core has only increased in density. I'm unaware of anywhere in the cities core that has seen any sort of migration of numbers to the cities burbs.

[OEincorparated]

Main article: Demographics of Toronto
Toronto population by year, within present boundaries
Year City CMA GTA
1861 65,085 193,844[59] —
1901 238,080 440,000[59] —
1951 1,117,470 1,262,000[59] —
1971 2,089,728 2,628,045[60] —
1976 2,124,295 2,803,101[61] —
1981 2,137,380 2,998,947[62] —
1986 2,192,721 3,733,085[63] —
1991 2,275,771[64] 3,893,933[65] 4,235,756[64]
1996 2,385,421[66] 4,263,759[66] 4,628,883[67]
2001 2,481,494[2] 4,682,897[2] 5,081,826[68]
2006 2,503,281[2] 5,113,149[2] 5,555,912[69]

This shows a trend of how surrounding areas have continually out grown Toronto.

[monkeyronin]

Originally Posted by OEincorparated

This shows a trend of how surrounding areas have continually out grown Toronto.

You claimed that people were leaving the city (specifically, the densest parts), which is not at all the case.

[dleung]

No, but despite all the construction downtown, and the increase in Greater Toronto's population by a million over the last 15 years, almost all of that growth went into the 905, while Toronto proper went from 2.4 to 2.5 million. We know that the daily transit ridership in this high-growth area - Peel, York and Durham region combined (population 3 million), is less than 300,000. The growth pattern out there largely continues to be of a suburban or tower-in-the-park nature. So all in all, there are good reasons against wasting transit dollars on areas that don't really want to abandon the automobile.

[OEincorparated]

Originally Posted by monkeyronin

You claimed that people were leaving the city (specifically, the densest parts), which is not at all the case.

I was thinking about Regent park when I wrote that, my apologies. But anyhow it looks like more people are choosing to live around the city then within the city now. This seems like the perfect time to move larger developement to areas that are more accessible to people living all around the city. Just my opinion though.

[monkeyronin]

Originally Posted by OEincorparated

I was thinking about Regent park when I wrote that, my apologies. But anyhow it looks like more people are choosing to live around the city then within the city now. This seems like the perfect time to move larger developement to areas that are more accessible to people living all around the city. Just my opinion though.

Peripheral sites are not more accessible for most GTA'ers though. Your idea of having a tower at Steeles for example would be more accessible to people in York region, but would be less accessible to people in Peel or Durham. Toronto (downtown) is still the centre of the region, and still the most easily accessible location for most of the population (considering its where all the train lines lead to).

[OEincorparated]

York Region is the fastest growing out of the three Regions. It has two major hwy's that are overly conjested from people having to commute downtown for work. If a couple of office towers move to Yonge/Steele it would only be a good thing. Durham and Peel can easily access location off of hwy 401.

[JustinB]

Originally Posted by OEincorparated

York Region is the fastest growing out of the three Regions. It has two major hwy's that are overly conjested from people having to commute downtown for work. If a couple of office towers move to Yonge/Steele it would only be a good thing. Durham and Peel can easily access location off of hwy 401.

Yonge, and Steeles is not easily accessible for Peel and Durham! It's a royal pain in the ass to travel to that area during the peak. I know, I used to do it from Brampton

Unless a company is offered significant incentives to move to that area, I do not see that area as high density development potential. It's not that great of an area, especially considering companies can set up shop in the Yonge/Sheppard area which is much closer to the 401, and a pretty mature area.

[JustinB]

Originally Posted by OEincorparated

Main article: Demographics of Toronto
Toronto population by year, within present boundaries
Year City CMA GTA
1861 65,085 193,844[59] —
1901 238,080 440,000[59] —
1951 1,117,470 1,262,000[59] —
1971 2,089,728 2,628,045[60] —
1976 2,124,295 2,803,101[61] —
1981 2,137,380 2,998,947[62] —
1986 2,192,721 3,733,085[63] —
1991 2,275,771[64] 3,893,933[65] 4,235,756[64]
1996 2,385,421[66] 4,263,759[66] 4,628,883[67]
2001 2,481,494[2] 4,682,897[2] 5,081,826[68]
2006 2,503,281[2] 5,113,149[2] 5,555,912[69]

This shows a trend of how surrounding areas have continually out grown Toronto.

Those numbers reflect the entire city of Toronto. Can you show stats that show the downtown area lost population, with a link to the source? As it stand, you are proving that Toronto is gaining population, and that includes the core.

[OEincorparated]

http://maps.google.ca/maps?f=q&sourc...,0.076818&z=14
This is going to be everyones stop off point at Steeles.

[flesh_is_weak]

Downtown Toronto taking on the characteristic of a suburb in favour of growth in the north? fat chance...and should that happen, that would be the death of Toronto...

[OEincorparated]

Sure it will work, just look at the map. I can design it efficiently to make it happen. Every part of Yonge and it side streets from south of 401 to north of Steeles. We will freeze taxes in the south and by the lake, to keep downtowner's happy. Now look Sheppard is pretty much parralel to the airport, we'll run Sheppard line eventual across hitting Thistletown, Albion Centre, Humber College and then the airport. Even makes seen to go into Missisauga and connect to Square One. Give's the south/west access to North York Center.

[flesh_is_weak]

freeze taxes downtown and, how do it put...undesirables will move in...i guess there's no 'politically correct' way of saying it, so i'll just say it...those low-income residents living in the fringes of the current downtown area, people who are more likely--thanks to their socio-economic status--to engage in criminal activity, will move in to the downtown core...Toronto will die the death that many other great cities in this continent have had

[OEincorparated]

It's more like Toronto will reinvent itself in a central location away from the lowland of Lake Ontario. With skyscrapers nowadays 15-20 years is all it'll take, Look at Dubai, Shenzhen, and Korean cities. Look some great historic cities like Paris, Madrid, Beijing, they reinvented themselves and use a centralized city center. Even NewYork, ShangHai, Guangzhou, they all meet in the middle, pulling in people from all direction.
Some people might say there is so much history downtown, but we will keep that history alive by making downtown a heritage site. Toronto is still a young city and with rail tracks in the north part of the city, Toronto will eventually include Vaughn/Richmond Hill/Markham in York, Missisauga/Brampton in Peel and Pickering/Ajax in Durham. The North Rail Station can be bigger and better then Union Station. People who work Yonge/Steeles can ride GO train and people who work Yonge/Sheppard can come by subway or car off of hwy401. Everything will get filled up from hwy401 to north of Steeles.