12 people? Really. You either over-exaggerate or under-estimate. Makes it hard to take any of it seriously!

But anyway, whenever I read your blustery prescriptions for an improved Toronto, I am again reminded that I am grateful that you are not in a position to solely make it so. You would toss the baby out with the bathwater, every time.
 
...and the city's latest Waterfront Transit planning report was delivered literally a few days ago (they're gonna beat the 2040 prediction by a decade or so).
 
innsertnamehere said:
Castle Frank is probably within walking distance of 10,000 people. Canada's densest neighborhood is literally next door.
Click to expand...

I understand you desperately want to prove its usefulness, however statistics are not on your side. 2014 ridership at this station is merely 7070, the only other worse stations are Rosedale. Summer Hill, Chester (all the ones I mentioned should be densified by replacing lowrise homes) and Old Mill along line 1/2.

Most St James Park residents take Sherbourne. Castle Frank, like Rosedale area, are typical examples of poor planning.

https://www.ttc.ca/PDF/Transit_Planning/Subway_ridership_2014.pdf
 
I live near Chester. The homes in this area are private property. I do think that Danforth Avenue could be somewhat densified as could some areas near some lower density stations. Perhaps we should look at areas that are under incredible densification of which there are many. There are towers go up all over the city. It is inevitable that some stations/lines will pass through lower density areas. It is not poor planning. Some folks on here simply want to blather.
 
adma said:
Ah, another derailed thread. And in the middle of the past few pages, my Spacing link seems lost and wan...
Click to expand...
I saw your link and read it. Thanks.

A memo went out to tenants at 2 Carlton that the application was being made to 'preserve future property rights' and is 'strictly procedural' ' long-term leases must be honored'. As maestro said back on page one.
 
I'm sorry I missed the discussion on this one as it was happening since I don't want to jump in on things that were mulled over 3-4 days ago. I would just say that any concerns over things like hospitals, school places, shops and other services can be so readily addressed through the planning process as to leave me quite undismayed even after hearing from the most dire prognosticators. We may have to get used to more 2nd and 3rd (dare I say 6th and 7th?) storey retail on main streets but that isn't so bad. Having to climb a set of stairs to get to your local Burger King might actually be a good thing!

The sidewalk consideration raised is relevant and they should be widened when possible. Luckily, it is quite possible in many areas. Besides, we are so far from crunch time on this point as there really aren't that many spots where it is a real problem. Having to step onto the road once in a while isn't the end of the world. If it is, then what is presaged for us by many great cities around the world indicates the end of the world might not be so scary after all.

Ksun,

If you read this I am curious if you actually think proposals like this shouldn't get built. Or, is it more that you wish policies were such that developers wouldn't have the same incentives to make such proposals given the abundance of choice they would have under policies that hewed more in the direction of what you want? It wasn't completely clear that you didn't just straight up think this was too dense-which surprised me.
 
So Castle Frank station's daily ridership of 7070 makes it one of the least used stops on the TTC. It's good to get exact figures. Thanks, Ksun. But that's closer to Insertnamehere's guesstimate of 10,000 within walking distance than to your dramatic statement about spending 2,000,000 dollars to provide a station for 12 people.

There should be a word in English for understatement for purely rhetorical effect. "Hypobole" would work. You would be guilty of it here.
 
ksun said:
. Again, what about Rosedale, the suburb within walking distance to downtown? I would just rework on all the streets and have a grid system to relace the current nonsense.
Click to expand...

This is a bad idea for two reasons...

A: the city would never have the funds to expropriate Rosedale, let alone demolish everything (including the mature tree canopy) and install the necessary high density infrastructure in its place. Topographically, it's not a good "grid" candidate anyway, as those windy roads are there for a reason...they follow the ravines Rosedale is made of.

B: why would you want to? Part of the success of Toronto's downtown is its extreme diversity...which includes enclaves for the wealthy. Do you know what Rosedale homeowners pay in property taxes? Trust me...they pay for those little peripheral subway stations.
 
Last edited:
Edward Skira said:
This is about more than the Yonge subway being overcrowded. This is about servicing all these people moving into these neighbourhoods. Sewage, garbage disposal, schools, hospitals, daycare, electricity, narrow sidewalks etc. You can put 5,000 or 50,000 additional people at Yonge and College but how do you provide services for them? How do they actually leave their buildings considering how narrow our downtown sidewalks and streets are. This is definitely the time to be discussing these issues before they blow up on us.
Click to expand...

But is any of that actually in jeopardy?

In general, Downtown Toronto is already equipped with the capacity to handle its working population, which easily outnumbers its "sleeping" population by a 2-1 margin. There's no danger of not being able to flush the toilets or not having enough electricity because the residential population tends to have peak hours that run opposite of the 1/2 million working population that leaves downtown after the general 9-5 period. In a way, we are just making more efficient use of existing infrastructure. Schools and daycare capacity can be increased as quickly as needed (if needed) the same as any other district of the city. Higher density simply makes delivering these services more cost efficient.

Aging infrastructure needs replacing anyway, so is a moot point.

Speaking of this project individually, it may be a moot point as well. Seeing as it is replacing a 318,000 sqft office building, it may very well be service capacity neutral...or perhaps even be an improvement over the status quo.

All this sky-is-falling rhetoric from the elected politicians who don't seem to have a clue what they are talking about, or the not-so-clever bureaucrats they hire is just getting in the way of Toronto's progress. They are just making excuses for not doing their jobs. But in the end, it's our fault, as we elected them on the basis of performing "magic" economics.
 
Last edited:
67Cup said:
So Castle Frank station's daily ridership of 7070 makes it one of the least used stops on the TTC. It's good to get exact figures. Thanks, Ksun. But that's closer to Insertnamehere's guesstimate of 10,000 within walking distance than to your dramatic statement about spending 2,000,000 dollars to provide a station for 12 people.

There should be a word in English for understatement for purely rhetorical effect. "Hypobole" would work. You would be guilty of it here.
Click to expand...

I am indeed guilty of hyperbole, but an annual ridership of 7,070 is vastly different from having 10,000 people living with walking distance, which assumes all those people use Castle Frank as the starting point of transit and walk there. In reality, the number of residents who live within 600 meters from this station and frequently use it is probably closer to 12 than 10,000.
 
ksun said:
I am indeed guilty of hyperbole, but an annual ridership of 7,070 is vastly different from having 10,000 people living with walking distance, which assumes all those people use Castle Frank as the starting point of transit and walk there. In reality, the number of residents who live within 600 meters from this station and frequently use it is probably closer to 12 than 10,000.
Click to expand...


First of all, it's average daily ridership...not "annual". And it's not really all that terrible.

Toronto's transit ace in the hole is its system integration...all surface routes connect with the subway. Castle Frank serves as the terminus for two surface routes as well as the South Rosedale community (yes...we must appease our wealthy folks).

At the time of planning the BD line, not only did the Parliament streetcar line terminate where the station was going to be located (unfortunately replaced by a bus by the time the station opened), St Jamestown style development was supposed to be far more widespread than it is...the entire east side of downtown was planned to look like that (wisely cancelled after St Jamestown was built).

I can see a time where Parliament may serve a mini relief-line purpose, reinvigorating ridership on Parliament and Castle Frank station. I can't really see the station vicinity itself redeveloped for increased walk-in ridership.
 
Last edited:
It does also serve rosedale school of the arts which is a high school that has the majority of its students coming by TTC from other parts of the city
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top