The future of the GTA

R

rfid

Well-known member
Forum Sponsor
Being bikers, we explore a lot of the urban area in the GTA and beyond. I was speculating how this might change in the future and want to see what others think will happen. In fact it's not even so much my speculation as it is the plans for the region with some of my intuition thrown in... Check out the links I post for each section!

Places to Grow: In about 20 years, there will be greater than 10 million people living in this region, roughly two-thirds the size of the NYC metro area right now.

Development will be contiguous west to east from Waterloo to Peterborough and north to south from Barrie to Niagara Falls. By contiguous, I mean it will roughly feel as if you never leave the city much like driving from Unionville to Streetsville. There will be a few protected areas like the Rouge Valley and Oak Ridges Moraine where there will be no development and it will seem as if you're in the middle of nowhere (like traversing the Don Valley on Rosedale).

There will be an international airport in Pickering and Buttonville will close. This area of the city will see explosive growth as an attempt is made to shift development from the Oak Ridges to Pickering, much like Pearson. This is a sharp contrast to the current state of the area.

Toronto will have 5 main subway lines and it will still not nearly be enough:
  • Bloor-Danforth (Sherway to Scarborough Centre)
  • Yonge-University (Vaughan Centre to Richmond Hill Centre)
  • Sheppard (Downsview to Scarborough Centre)
  • Eglinton (Airport to Kennedy)
  • Queen (Keele/Dundas West to Don Mills & Eglinton East via downtown)

The following additions will be made to the freeway network (what will happen to our twisties!):

But let's also step back and look at what could have been:
 
2012 will take care of Toronto hopefully.

edit: 2012 has a higher chance of coming through than the word of a politician.
 
Good points....i highly agree with you.

Too bad TTC will still rape us with metro pass prices.

Montreal > Toronto.
 
Last edited:
UJelly said:
Good points....i highly agree with you.

Too bad TTC will still rape us with metro pass prices.

Montreal > Toronto.
Click to expand...
Vancouver > Montreal > Toronto
 
Great... Even more of the country way I grew up is to be taken over by the yuppies...
Guess I'll enjoy it while I can and be sure I buy a home 2 hours or more away from that hell hole.
 
I don't see why development should stop at where it is now considering the space we have and the demand for 4000+ sq.ft houses, so yes, I think urban sprawl is realistic. Sure as hell can't force people to live in condo's in urban centers to ease congestion and promote density to support public transit, just no way unless houses in the 'burbs are priced astronomically in comparison to apartments.

What I also see being realistic is the infrastructure not keeping up. The highways are congested enough currently, so the prospect of an additional 5 million people in the GTA is horrific in my mind.

But I think if Toronto continues to be the hub for jobs in 20 years, then we have to keep the price of gasoline in perspective if commutes keep getting longer in distance and time. I don't think salaries can't keep up with the increasing cost of living forever so people will have to sacrifice their huge houses for condo's closer to work. It's the only logical choice in my mind.
 
Deimos said:
I don't see why development should stop at where it is now considering the space we have and the demand for 4000+ sq.ft houses, so yes, I think urban sprawl is realistic. Sure as hell can't force people to live in condo's in urban centers to ease congestion and promote density to support public transit, just no way unless houses in the 'burbs are priced astronomically in comparison to apartments.

What I also see being realistic is the infrastructure not keeping up. The highways are congested enough currently, so the prospect of an additional 5 million people in the GTA is horrific in my mind.

But I think if Toronto continues to be the hub for jobs in 20 years, then we have to keep the price of gasoline in perspective if commutes keep getting longer in distance and time. I don't think salaries can't keep up with the increasing cost of living forever so people will have to sacrifice their huge houses for condo's closer to work. It's the only logical choice in my mind.
Click to expand...

or start avoiding the city like the plague and let the cities around Toronto blossom. Don't you think people will get to the point where 1. they like their house, 2. the commute costs a small mortgage (time +money)......

makes sense to find work closer to home or in the opposite direction.
 
Work where you live. Live where you work
Or go to a different set up put factories etc. Where people live.
Do all of the offices need to be down town?
 
nfq said:
or start avoiding the city like the plague and let the cities around Toronto blossom. Don't you think people will get to the point where 1. they like their house, 2. the commute costs a small mortgage (time +money)......

makes sense to find work closer to home or in the opposite direction.
Click to expand...

True, and we've seen that already with industries moving out of the core into the burbs and establishing themselves in tax friendly municipalities. But the fact remains that a large amount of people will still be driving into Toronto, and increased immigration into southern Ontario will add to whatever numbers are out there now.

Of course I'd rather live and work downtown, but that won't be the case for everyone or even myself sometimes for reasons outside our control. If major sectors could set up shop outside the GTA that would be awesome but I think it's difficult for companies to work out of newer cities if the incentives just aren't there.
 
lil red bird said:
Do all of the offices need to be down town?
Click to expand...

How else do you expect the "financial experts" to split that pound of coke so they can get the day started. Your live savings are in their hands and being in a central location is convenient otherwise they could never leverage your savings for 5 times it's worth and gamble it.
 
Deimos said:
I don't see why development should stop at where it is now considering the space we have and the demand for 4000+ sq.ft houses, so yes, I think urban sprawl is realistic.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but you have to try real hard not to see the problem with urban sprawl.

Urban decay: If it becomes too easy and cheap to leave the city core, it is slowly abandoned, turning neighbourhoods into slums and seeding the growth of criminal activity.
Insular mindset: The cookie-cutter neighbourhoods and communal isolation of the suburbs promote social (and political) disenfranchisement.
Concrete canyons: Urban cores designed around the automobile are giant, windswept, unwelcoming environments. Nothing is at a human scale; a building just across the boulevard can be a quarter mile away, or the din of traffic can make casual conversation impossible.
Low driving standards: Because driving is the only option to get around in many areas, licensing standards remain low so that even dangerously bad drivers can get to their jobs and avoid being cut out of the economic loop.
That 'new car' smell"One of the most toxic environments we regularly expose ourselves to, is the interior of our cars.
Short-term health problems: Smog, particulates prompt allergic reactions and asthma attacks.
Long-term health problems: The necessity of car ownership displaces the need to move ourselves, promoting obesity, heart disease, diabetes... on epidemic scales.
Congestion: The picture of thousands of people stopped on the freeway, having scheduled time out of their day to sit idling on their way to work or home, is plain nuts.
Car ownership costs: Depreciation, insurance, maintenance, repairs, parking, licensing. Strangely, people only count the price of fuel when costing car ownership.
Flash floods: The miles of paved highway, plus arterial, residential and private driveways (plus all the big single-home rooftops) cannot absorb rainwater, to be released over a period of days.
Localised greenhouse effect: The same roads and roofs that encourage flash floods also turn sunlight into heat instead of plant life, and oxygen.
Reduction of natural habitats: Housing development necessarily cuts into green spaces, sometimes some ecologically sensitive ones that support thriving, complex, biodiversity.
Global warming: The most common complaint with the automobile, but not necessarily the worst of them IMO.
Distracted driving: People try to make up for the wasted time by eating, shaving, talking on the cell phone, balancing their spreeadsheet...
Road Rage: The cumulative effect of social isolation, bad drivers, poor road design, and congestion is road rage.
Traffic injuries and fatalities: The more we drive, the greater the exposure to this risk.
Resource wars / Terrorism: Being so dependent on anything supplied by an 'evil axis' is a bad idea. We will be paying the geopolitical price for decades, probably centuries.
Loss of freedom: People should be up in arms at the necessity of owning a car, forced entirely by the design of our urban spaces.
 
fastar1 said:
Urban decay: If it becomes too easy and cheap to leave the city core, it is slowly abandoned, turning neighbourhoods into slums and seeding the growth of criminal activity.
Insular mindset: The cookie-cutter neighbourhoods and communal isolation of the suburbs promote social (and political) disenfranchisement.
Concrete canyons: Urban cores designed around the automobile are giant, windswept, unwelcoming environments. Nothing is at a human scale; a building just across the boulevard can be a quarter mile away, or the din of traffic can make casual conversation impossible.
Low driving standards: Because driving is the only option to get around in many areas, licensing standards remain low so that even dangerously bad drivers can get to their jobs and avoid being cut out of the economic loop.
That 'new car' smell"One of the most toxic environments we regularly expose ourselves to, is the interior of our cars.
Short-term health problems: Smog, particulates prompt allergic reactions and asthma attacks.
Long-term health problems: The necessity of car ownership displaces the need to move ourselves, promoting obesity, heart disease, diabetes... on epidemic scales.
Congestion: The picture of thousands of people stopped on the freeway, having scheduled time out of their day to sit idling on their way to work or home, is plain nuts.
Car ownership costs: Depreciation, insurance, maintenance, repairs, parking, licensing. Strangely, people only count the price of fuel when costing car ownership.
Flash floods: The miles of paved highway, plus arterial, residential and private driveways (plus all the big single-home rooftops) cannot absorb rainwater, to be released over a period of days.
Localised greenhouse effect: The same roads and roofs that encourage flash floods also turn sunlight into heat instead of plant life, and oxygen.
Reduction of natural habitats: Housing development necessarily cuts into green spaces, sometimes some ecologically sensitive ones that support thriving, complex, biodiversity.
Global warming: The most common complaint with the automobile, but not necessarily the worst of them IMO.
Distracted driving: People try to make up for the wasted time by eating, shaving, talking on the cell phone, balancing their spreeadsheet...
Road Rage: The cumulative effect of social isolation, bad drivers, poor road design, and congestion is road rage.
Traffic injuries and fatalities: The more we drive, the greater the exposure to this risk.
Resource wars / Terrorism: Being so dependent on anything supplied by an 'evil axis' is a bad idea. We will be paying the geopolitical price for decades, probably centuries.
Loss of freedom: People should be up in arms at the necessity of owning a car, forced entirely by the design of our urban spaces.
Click to expand...

but won't all of those create jobs?
 
fastar1 said:
Sorry, but you have to try real hard not to see the problem with urban sprawl.
Click to expand...

I never said there WASN'T a problem with urban sprawl. I was making a point that if there is a demand for it, then it's likely to be indulged by growing municipalities and developers. That being said, I agree with all your points.
 
Hi all, actually I am a newbie and do not know much about it. But I expect you to help me!
I am curious to know about GTA. I remember that when I was a child, I used to play a game 'Grand theft auto'. It was loving to me! you see.
Does the GTA stands for 'Grand theft auto'?
regards
 
Dillon said:
Hi all, actually I am a newbie and do not know much about it. But I expect you to help me!
I am curious to know about GTA. I remember that when I was a child, I used to play a game 'Grand theft auto'. It was loving to me! you see.
Does the GTA stands for 'Grand theft auto'?
regards
Click to expand...

Greater Toronto Area.

Why are all your posts so far, necro'ing old forum topics?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom