cdr108
Senior Member
just like they knew all the gravy and could balance the budget without increases in taxes, service cuts, etc .... GUARANTEED !
|
|
|
- Thread starter MetroMan
- Start date
- Status
just like they knew all the gravy and could balance the budget without increases in taxes, service cuts, etc .... GUARANTEED !
uptown
Active Member
Why not? The city exists at the leisure of the provincial government -- the Premier could say any funding is conditional upon Rob Ford running the 100 metre dash within 12 seconds if he was so inclined.
adma
Superstar
"Daddy, I got my girlfriend in trouble. Can you lend us money for an abortion?"
GenerationW
Senior Member
Signed,
Adam Giambrone's teenage years
Towered
Senior Member
Funny how quiet Ford's unapologetic supporters on this board are now.
Tulse
Senior Member
Sure, he could, but it would cause a host of serious political problems if the premiere began micromanaging Toronto.
ibhattac
New Member
Well, it looks like Team Ford basically copped to there not being any private money/interest in the Sheppard subway.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/the-sheppard-subway-lines-troubled-history/article2133084/
From caption #9 " . . . His policy director, Mark Towhey, says the city needs the money soon to persuade Ottawa to recommit its $333-million. He says public money will pay upfront expenses. The city will use a combination of tax-increment financing, development charges and proceeds from selling parts of an $18-billion real estate portfolio to pay for the remainder. He expects the total bill to be far below the $4.2-billion estimate. “I would love for it to be 100 per cent from the private sector,” Mr. Towhey said. “I think it’s more efficient for us to put in public-sector money if we know we have it because then we can actually shape the beginning of it better.”"
*sigh*
At times like these it is worth recalling that the absolute minimum floor for subway supportive population is about the equivalent density of 115 persons/hectare, if not more, around a station stop. With LRT this minimum floor is about 70 persons/hectare, and works all the way up to 140 persons/hectare (Metrolinx, Pembina, TTC, Viva, etc, etc.)
For the sake of argument, let's take neighbourhood #118 (Tam O Shanter/Sullivan) on the City of Toronto neighbourhood profile page. It's a neighbourhood that straddles Sheppard. It had about 27,420 people in the 2006 census. Let's be generous and say they grew at about 3% to 28,000 people, give or take. This is not an unreasonable assumption based on the growth rate between 2001 and 2006. Unless I'm using my GIS incorrectly, the geographic area for that neighbourhood is about 5.7 million square metres, or about 570 hectares. That's about 49 people per hectare. This suggests that the subway will be cost-inefficient.
We need to get about 65,550 people into that neighbourhood to get to 115 people per hectare and make one subway stop cost-effective. There's perhaps 28,000 there right now. We need to move an additional 37,550 people into the community. The census average household size for that neighbourhood was 3 persons per household. Therefore, we need to add an additional 12,516 households into that community. Assuming 1 household is 1 residential dwelling unit, anyone willing to bet how receptive the resident's associations and ratepayer groups will be to adding 12,516 additional units of new housing housing onto their leafy streets? For context there's only about 700 additional new units in the pipeline for that neighbourhood. Only 11,816 units to go to support one solitary subway stop!
Go Team Ford!
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/the-sheppard-subway-lines-troubled-history/article2133084/
From caption #9 " . . . His policy director, Mark Towhey, says the city needs the money soon to persuade Ottawa to recommit its $333-million. He says public money will pay upfront expenses. The city will use a combination of tax-increment financing, development charges and proceeds from selling parts of an $18-billion real estate portfolio to pay for the remainder. He expects the total bill to be far below the $4.2-billion estimate. “I would love for it to be 100 per cent from the private sector,” Mr. Towhey said. “I think it’s more efficient for us to put in public-sector money if we know we have it because then we can actually shape the beginning of it better.”"
*sigh*
At times like these it is worth recalling that the absolute minimum floor for subway supportive population is about the equivalent density of 115 persons/hectare, if not more, around a station stop. With LRT this minimum floor is about 70 persons/hectare, and works all the way up to 140 persons/hectare (Metrolinx, Pembina, TTC, Viva, etc, etc.)
For the sake of argument, let's take neighbourhood #118 (Tam O Shanter/Sullivan) on the City of Toronto neighbourhood profile page. It's a neighbourhood that straddles Sheppard. It had about 27,420 people in the 2006 census. Let's be generous and say they grew at about 3% to 28,000 people, give or take. This is not an unreasonable assumption based on the growth rate between 2001 and 2006. Unless I'm using my GIS incorrectly, the geographic area for that neighbourhood is about 5.7 million square metres, or about 570 hectares. That's about 49 people per hectare. This suggests that the subway will be cost-inefficient.
We need to get about 65,550 people into that neighbourhood to get to 115 people per hectare and make one subway stop cost-effective. There's perhaps 28,000 there right now. We need to move an additional 37,550 people into the community. The census average household size for that neighbourhood was 3 persons per household. Therefore, we need to add an additional 12,516 households into that community. Assuming 1 household is 1 residential dwelling unit, anyone willing to bet how receptive the resident's associations and ratepayer groups will be to adding 12,516 additional units of new housing housing onto their leafy streets? For context there's only about 700 additional new units in the pipeline for that neighbourhood. Only 11,816 units to go to support one solitary subway stop!
Go Team Ford!
Last edited:
Electrify
Senior Member
Just tweeted Mr. Ford:
"@TOMayorFord Build the Sheppard extension above ground, saving billions. You're welcome."
"@TOMayorFord Build the Sheppard extension above ground, saving billions. You're welcome."
Armbruster
Active Member
With Ford's Director of Policy Mark Towhey in the news with this latest TTC silliness, I thought I would post the link to Steve Munro's useful primer on this man who has been leading Ford down his disastrous transit path.
The short, non-TL;DR version: Towhey is a dangerously ill-informed, self-described radical who should be kept far away from City Hall and especially the TTC. His now-deleted blog post (archived here) proposed to stop all funding to the TTC, sell off the assets, and to do it all in 2011. His response to people who depend on the TTC? "Well, life's tough."
In a familiar refrain, he figured the private sector would eventually step in to deliver transit. In the meantime, he says, people would drive cars, natch, so some of the sales proceeds should go to roads. As for everyone else, "others will be forced to use bicycles, hire more taxis, join car pools, etc. Apparently, that’s good for the environment, even. Bonus."
Christ, what an asshole.
Steve Munro: Rob Ford Campaign Disavows Policy Advisor’s Transit Blog
See also: Ford advisor's opinions on TTC, media, all his own from the Toronto Star
The short, non-TL;DR version: Towhey is a dangerously ill-informed, self-described radical who should be kept far away from City Hall and especially the TTC. His now-deleted blog post (archived here) proposed to stop all funding to the TTC, sell off the assets, and to do it all in 2011. His response to people who depend on the TTC? "Well, life's tough."
In a familiar refrain, he figured the private sector would eventually step in to deliver transit. In the meantime, he says, people would drive cars, natch, so some of the sales proceeds should go to roads. As for everyone else, "others will be forced to use bicycles, hire more taxis, join car pools, etc. Apparently, that’s good for the environment, even. Bonus."
Christ, what an asshole.
Steve Munro: Rob Ford Campaign Disavows Policy Advisor’s Transit Blog
See also: Ford advisor's opinions on TTC, media, all his own from the Toronto Star
ibhattac
New Member
I also just realised that 49 people per hectare doesn't meet the LRT floor either. Continuing with the math, neighbourhood #118 would need about 39,900 people to make LRT work. That's an additional 11,900 people. At 3 persons per household, that is an additional 3966 units of housing. Minus that the 700 already in the works, only 3200 more to go!
Last edited:
ibhattac
New Member
Continuing on the theme about density and everyone's desire for subways everywhere, the City of Toronto has a geographic area of about 641 square kilometres. That's about 64,100 hectares. At 115 people per hectare average to support transit, we'd need a population of about 7,371,500 people. To support LRT at about 70 people per hectare, we'd need a population of about 4,487,000. The Ministry of Finance's population projection for the City, the most optimistic one out there, only gets us up to about 3,000,000 and change by the 2030s.
As an aside, my understanding of these density floors refers to average population density over the course of an entire day, not simply a peak period influx during rush hour for the working day.
Hell, I'd be curious to know what the population densities are around existing subway stations along Bloor/Danforth, YUS, and Sheppard.
While I count myself amongst the many, Ford Nation included,that would love to see subways everywhere, the numbers, regrettably, simply don't support subways.
As an aside, my understanding of these density floors refers to average population density over the course of an entire day, not simply a peak period influx during rush hour for the working day.
Hell, I'd be curious to know what the population densities are around existing subway stations along Bloor/Danforth, YUS, and Sheppard.
While I count myself amongst the many, Ford Nation included,that would love to see subways everywhere, the numbers, regrettably, simply don't support subways.
Fish&Chips
New Member
I cannot be disappointed in Rob Ford since my expectations could not be any lower. I am, however, disappointed in members of the executive committee who have become Ford's enablers in his unprecedented attack on public transit. I'm pointing my finger at Milczyn and Stinz in particular. Both of them supported and voted in favour of the Transit City. In fact, I recall Stinz being an enthusiastic supporter. In Milczyn's case, he voted in favour of Transit City both at City Council and as a TTC Board member. How many tens of millions of dollars have been squandered as a result of their reversal? No wonder Milczyn didn't want a public vote on the cancellation of Transit City. Wouldn't want his duplicity to be on record, would he? Can't wait for the next municipal election.
Urban Shocker
Doyenne
He's also portraying private sector businesses as a gravy train that will pay for new subway lines.
Tulse
Senior Member
But not quite so much any more, or else he wouldn't be begging for public money to build his subway.
Urban Shocker
Doyenne
Yes, that's the fun of watching Fat Boy Two twist in the wind now that reality has intruded so cruelly. What will Ford Nation think now? I'm also wondering how the Fords would treat their own employees - at Deco Widgets and Nuts, or whatever it's called - if they ever need to reduce staff. One would hope they'd give better severence packages than those he's offering to City employees, one would hope those employees have nice defined benefit company pensions, one would hope Frick & Frack would follow best practice private sector values, not worst.
- Status