2.1. Community’s alternative plan

2. The present submission of the alternative plan, unanimously approved by the Concord West community, for the location and articulation of the traffic hub required by the 407 Transitway.

2.1. The alternative plan, unanimously approved by the Concord West community, for the location and articulation of the traffic hub required by the 407 Transitway.

In essence, the alternative plan unanimously approved by the community on August 24, 2010, General Meeting preserves all the essential linkages, services and infrastructures required by the 407 Transitway Project, but leaves the ORC greenland under petition free for transfer to the TRCA, and in addition requires no public purchase or expropriation of private lands south of Highway 7. The alternative proposal is shown in Figure 5. Its features are:

• Location of the GO station either (1) on the emplacement of the old Concord train station along the western border of parcel A of the Concord Floral lands, 1890 Highway 7 (see red lined box in Figure 5); or (2) under (built into) the projected Concord Corporate GO Centre slated to occupy the same parcel A (see solid red curved box in Figure 5); or (3), still further east, partially occupying the eastern parcel B of the same Concord Floral lands, the said parcel B being currently owned by the ORC/OMI.

• Location of the Metrolinx station on currently held OMT land on the southeast side of the intersection of Highway 7 with Centre Street (see box in green lines in Figure 5).

• Connection between the GO and Metrolinx stations via a 300-350 meter long elevated skywalk with escalators and moving walkways (see purple stapled box in Figure 5).  This elevated walkway can also be used to permit safe pedestrian crossing of Highway 7 at Centre Street, permitting the timing of traffic lights in this intersection to be governed solely by the needs of vehicular flow.

• Location of the car parking lot and bus facilities (drop-off, pick-up and service) on the land running northward, on the northeast side of the intersection of Highway 7 with Centre Street (see black stapled box in Figure 5, and text indication in Figure 6).  The proposed location provides better vehicular access along a portion of Highway 7 that is currently unencumbered by traffic bottlenecks.

• Retracing the route of the rapid-bus road or transitway connecting to the Metrolinx station to hug the 407 highway path (see lines in green in Figure 5), so as not to destroy the ORC greenland under petition, and minimize the proximity of bus circulation lanes to the Concord West community. The bus transitway may still have to be elevated, just not over the ORC greenland in question.

• Construction of an underground tunnel to cross the railway tracks at the end of Rockview Gardens (solid black trace in Figure 5), this time actually designed to permit access by Concord West residents to the ORC greenland in question and the Bartley Smith Greenway/Langstaff Ecopark. Along with this tunnel, (1) proper fencing-in of the railway line on both sides of the tracks should be undertaken for both safety and acoustic dampening purposes, and (2) a small bridge for pedestrian use should be rebuilt over the Don River, to permit access from the ORC greenland to the path of the Bartley Smith Greenway/Langstaff Ecopark, which lies to the east of the Don River.

Next: 2.2. Merits of community’s plan
Previous: 1.8. Sept 14, 2010 meeting

This entry was posted in Formal Sumission to OMT, with History. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to 2.1. Community’s alternative plan

  1. Alexandra says:

    Wow. You wouldn’t be of the same Rea family that is currently trying to sell the Concord Floral property bundled with the ORC property being sold by CB Richard Ellis, would you? Because, if you are, perhaps you’d like to sit down with Concord West -and with the municipality as well, if you wish – to discuss how moving the hub north just might be a good outcome for everyone.

    What’s disturbing about your comment is first, that you label our fight to stop the destruction of a heritage greenspace as a NIMBY issue – which it’s not. You should inform yourself a little better. It may not be to you, but to many people in Vaughan, the Bartley Smith Greenway is one of the few remaining natural heritage treasures in Vaughan which has not been destroyed by development. Its fragmentation, combined with the pollution that will be associated with an intermodal hub will be its certain death. Perhaps you have not heard that several species at risk make use of the greenway corridor. Or perhaps you do not care. Our community does. But it is not only species at risk that make use of the corridor, but a diversity of other animals and birds and insects which rely on the meadows and river for their survival. But perhaps that is not an issue for you either. Surely, it is of no importance to you that only remaining contact our community has with the beauty and the healing power of nature which once was what made Vaughan special to us, is this greenspace and its connection to the rest of the greenway. It was our seniors who have loved this land for a generation who brought this fight forward, but it is all of us who have joined in to stop its destruction. So, you and we are clearly sickened by different things.

    You may be right that we are ‘screwed’. And it is a sad statement that somehow that would seem to give you pleasure. But I would say this – the Concord Floral lands are clearly not ‘untouchable’, as there was a great fight to have them rezoned from agricultural to mixed use to allow the construction of high rise condominiums. And this is what is planned. That, to me, is also sad – but it’s not my fight. But since there is such a great desire to ‘intensify’ there, to the north – why not place the hub where it would service this intensification – and benefit the Rea family? A residential/condominium development complex, with a commercial base, serviced by transit would seem to be a desirable arrangement for commuters and residents alike. From a business perspective – for I presume you are just concerned with profits -that would seem to be an ideal marriage. You would not cry NIMBY there, would you?

    An intermodal hub which services nobody presently identifiable, while the commercial services and businesses, as well as the residential units, will lie to the north, where the Concord Floral farm used to be, would have a much more suitable location there, where future business are being planned, than on top of a fragile greenspace that abuts one of the oldest communities in Vaughan, where it would destroy both the greenspace and our community as well, not to mention the Upper West Don River.

    Perhaps there simply should not be a Concord Station. It was not envisioned in the Big Move and it has frequently been described only as a ‘proposed’ station. That would be fine for us too. If that is what you want, then so be it.

  2. James W. Rea says:

    This is ridiculous. All you NIMBY people sicken me, the Concord Floral Lands are untouchable and you guys are screwed!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s