Richmond Hill High Tech Transit Oriented Community | ?m | 80s | Metrus | BDP Quadrangle

the complaints here should be focused on the urban design and mix of uses - the area needs a more comprehensive plan than what it got. One can only hope that it evolves as it is built out.

VMC received that comprehensive level of planning, and as it is built out that will become more evident, especially since the two major landowners are buying into it. We have yet to see any signs here that similar efforts will occur.

The plans we saw were obviously rushed to get them in front of the province in advance of the election, the question is how much room there is for refinement, and if the landowners here (do we even know who they are?) care to produce something with any amount of effort here like is happening in VMC.
 
Yeah, it will take time to see what level of effort they're actually putting in but giving them Site Plan approval in the EMZO removes a good chunk of the municipality's ability to govern aspects of urban design.And I agree the density and height, per se, are less concerns than how this community will actually function.through its design and mix of uses Time will tell how those shake out but there's certainly reason to be concerned at this point.

Metrus owns the lands in Richmond Hill Centre.
Condor owns the lands in Langstaff Gateway.
They're both subsidiaries of the larger DeGasperis group of companies.
 
Hmm and let's take a look at the DeGasperis family and all their donations to the PC party and associated ridings shall we (from 2017 to 2021), safe to say they've been a major donor:

EFRS

finances.elections.on.ca finances.elections.on.ca

This is all just Polished Corruption 101 here. Literally stripping municipal land control to 1 family because they've donated large sums to you party, and are helping finance your party's campaign.
 
I don't see how that's any different from the subway being extended to VMC to benefit the land owners in that area or the Kirby GO shenanigans. Or that LPC MP in BC who flipped 21 houses. We need to stop pretending as if there's a party immune from this.
 
There is a difference in that there was a direct deal between the province and the landowners in this instance and that did not happen at VMC. But you are certainly right that anyone who thinks the DeGasperis family or any other large developer in Ontario donates only to the PCs and not the Liberals is out to lunch. If they gave disproportionately to the former in the last election, it's probably because it was clear the Liberals weren't going to win but the big money flows to the big parties pretty consistently.
 
TJ O'Pootertoot said:
There is a difference in that there was a direct deal between the province and the landowners in this instance and that did not happen at VMC. But you are certainly right that anyone who thinks the DeGasperis family or any other large developer in Ontario donates only to the PCs and not the Liberals is out to lunch. If they gave disproportionately to the former in the last election, it's probably because it was clear the Liberals weren't going to win but the big money flows to the big parties pretty consistently.
Click to expand...
Exactly this. And to add, it seems like the DeGasperis family's donations shift with the electoral winds (ie: whichever party that is in power or appears poised to win). They've donated to the Ontario Liberals as well in the past.

The Ontario Liberals are crooked when it comes to working with/being in bed with developers; but the PCs just make it blatantly obvious, are more egregious, and dont even try to hide the fact.
 
Lenser said:
This is a polarizing and extreme response to "sprawl." It fails to acknowledge the mediating influence of infill, laneway housing, mid-rise and so-called "missing middle" urban designs. There's an entire pantheon of sensible responses to the housing crisis; we are ill-served if all we are presented is the "wisdom" of several 60+ stories of skyscraper condos huddled together on the same tight patch of land.
Click to expand...
Yea but homeowners vote and if you proposed allowing **gasp** 4 story midrises, then they might have to interact with ** the POORS ** and suburbanites like driving everywhere and will 100% vote you out if you tried putting :mad:APARTMENTS:mad: next to their mcmansion

So the only solution is to cram all the poors into condo ghettos and keep them away from good homeowning folk, or let the housing affordability crisis continue until 2 families are playing for your mortgage by renting your basement together.
 
MrGoose said:
Yea but homeowners vote and if you proposed allowing **gasp** 4 story midrises, then they might have to interact with ** the POORS ** and suburbanites like driving everywhere and will 100% vote you out if you tried putting :mad:APARTMENTS:mad: next to their mcmansion

So the only solution is to cram all the poors into condo ghettos and keep them away from good homeowning folk, or let the housing affordability crisis continue until 2 families are playing for your mortgage by renting your basement together.
Click to expand...
Nawwww.... it's not as bad as all that.

I think progress is being made, albeit slowly. I see little opposition, for example, to 6-10 story mid-rise along arterials here in the east end. People in general understand that housing is a serious issue and that things simply have to change away from the status quo that held sway for decades . I think you would find just as much opposition to this kind of very tall, ultra-dense proposal in a leafy suburb of Mississauga or Pickering as you would in the Beach, or Rosedale, or Forest Hill... just because it's so abruptly out of scale. But mid-rise and infill's a different matter. Most people get that this is a necessary evolution in Canadian urbanism.

Yes, there remains some very crusty and entitled nymbyism to overcome, but things are indeed in flux; it's a work in progress. However - this particular development, if built, would be a horrendous imposition on the landscape - the very opposite of smart urbanism.
 
Like so many condo communities in the suburbs of Toronto, as much as they will try, most residents will be car owners and use a car as their primary mode of travel.
 
christiesplits said:
Like so many condo communities in the suburbs of Toronto, as much as they will try, most residents will be car owners and use a car as their primary mode of travel.
Click to expand...
VMC has condos completed with only one parking space for every 3 units - lots of people are living in condos like these without cars.
 
innsertnamehere said:
VMC has condos completed with only one parking space for every 3 units - lots of people are living in condos like these without cars.
Click to expand...

I haven't seen the MZO's yet but they will have (or should have) parking rates. It'd be shocking if they're not at least in that 0.3 spaces/unit range, if not lower. I mean, this is allegedly a transit-oriented community, right?
 
innsertnamehere said:
the complaints here should be focused on the urban design and mix of uses - the area needs a more comprehensive plan than what it got. One can only hope that it evolves as it is built out.

VMC received that comprehensive level of planning, and as it is built out that will become more evident, especially since the two major landowners are buying into it. We have yet to see any signs here that similar efforts will occur.

The plans we saw were obviously rushed to get them in front of the province in advance of the election, the question is how much room there is for refinement, and if the landowners here (do we even know who they are?) care to produce something with any amount of effort here like is happening in VMC.
Click to expand...
Exactly. FYI, RH Council passed the Richmond Hill Centre Secondary Plan. It has a pretty solid vision, good requirements for developments, and A LOT of density. The Well was one of the inspirations for Urban Strategies, which was hired to make it. They made this plan to avoid a situation where the province forces something that isn't well thought-out. Despite their best efforts, Doug Ford's donors seem to want Hong Kong heights and very minimal amenities, public spaces, good design, or retail. You know - things that actually create community.

The secondary plan achieves all of the objectives of transit-oriented communities, with surprisingly very good transit integration, but we all know whose voice matters most at Queen's Park.
 

Ontario Newsroom

news.ontario.ca news.ontario.ca

Thornhill – With new transit-oriented communities (TOCs) at the future Bridge and High Tech stations along the Yonge North Subway Extension, the Ontario government is building more than 40,000 homes near transit in York Region. By building transit-oriented communities around the subway extension in this growing region, the government will also reduce gridlock, create economic opportunities and support 19,000 new jobs in the region. As a result of TOC proceeds, the province will also fund and build an additional transit station at Royal Orchard, further improving access to transit for residents in Thornhill, Markham and York Region.
“After decades of inaction by previous governments, our government is saying ‘yes’ to building housing and subways,” said Premier Doug Ford. “Others will find any reason to say ‘no’ to delay desperately needed housing and transit with more studies, committees or reports. Instead, our government is keeping costs down for families by building more homes and tackling gridlock head-on by building subways, Highway 413 and the Bradford Bypass.”
The TOCs at Bridge and High Tech stations will bring new housing, parkland, commercial, retail and community spaces all within walking distance of transit. By building more homes through these high-density and mixed-use communities, the province can also offset the construction costs of Royal Orchard station through TOC proceeds.
“This is a leap forward towards achieving our transit vision to help bring more housing, jobs and convenient transit for the people of York Region,” said Kinga Surma, Minister of Infrastructure. “We are making tremendous progress as part of our province’s transit-oriented communities program that will help increase ridership, reduce gridlock, spur economic growth within the region and offset the cost of critical transit construction, which puts money back into the taxpayers’ pockets.”
Minister’s Zoning Orders are being used to support the development of Bridge and High Tech TOCs, which will help cut unnecessary red-tape and deliver more homes and transit sooner to the people of York Region.
“Under the leadership of Premier Ford, our government is using every resource to address the housing supply crisis head-on,” said Steve Clark, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. “These Minister’s Zoning Orders will help create transit-oriented communities while building more than 40,000 much-needed new homes for Ontarians and their families.”
Ontario continues to work with its municipal partners to create more transit-oriented communities that will increase the supply of housing, including community housing. The province recently announced it is partnering with the City of Toronto and the private sector to build five transit-oriented communities along the Ontario Line, which will create approximately 7,000 more homes.
“Our government recognizes how important it is to build reliable, modern rapid transit that will connect communities across York Region and beyond,” said Caroline Mulroney, Minister of Transportation. “The Yonge North Subway Extension will unlock people’s access to housing and jobs, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and help build Ontario’s economy.”
Click to expand...

So the short of it is that the developers here have agreed to pay for Royal Orchard Station in exchange for the approvals here. That leaves only Drewry as the remaining unfunded station on the extension.

If Royal Orchard gets built and Drewry doesn't.. man, what a miss that would be.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top