Palma
Senior Member
I to believe lakefront is not as desirable as the real downtown but apparently people desire being near water and it is expensive. Guess because you hopefully won't be looking at other buildings in front of yours
I to believe lakefront is not as desirable as the real downtown but apparently people desire being near water and it is expensive. Guess because you hopefully won't be looking at other buildings in front of yours
Talk to the builders about that. Have you seen the crazy prices they're asking for pre-con? East Bayfront prices are starting at $700 psf and up. Ice was asking $550 psf starting in 2008. Tridel will probably be asking over $700 psf next year when it comes out. You make it sound like Yorkville is the only desirable area cuz it's asking at $1000 psf.
A condo on the lake, with a view of the islands, walking distance to downtown, short walk to St. Lawrence market. Where do you get this "no movie theatres" thing ... it's a short walk to the existing cinema near Front/Market. There's currently several major grocery stores in walking distance. And more retail will surely appear after there's actually something built.And as more and more condos get built there, with not much else, it could turn into a ghetto
You need to compare real estate price of waterfront versus prime downtown for buildings of the same age and quality, right? Compare with those new downtown condos, such as Lumiere, Bunano, X2, or those under construction, such as Aura, or Piccaso and see which is more expensive.
Plus how many of those waterfront condo owners can actually see Lake Ontario in their unit? Not many. Less than 30% I would say. If one lives by the lake and faces north, what's the point. Toronto is not Miami, even if you have unobstructed lakeview, what do you see Oct through May each year? It is depressing.
I agree with you that builders are really taking advantage of ample land supply near the lake. But as far as I can see, south of the railway, it is always condo, condo condo. Increasingly high density of people yet not so many urban amenities. Not even a movie theatre, not to mention any shopping street/plaza. Its desirability will simply decline as time goes by.
The fact that there is still so much land to develop in 2011 is already strong evidence of its long term undesirability, isn't it?
Higher patronage of the Yonge line compared to Spadina is partly due to the bus route structure. Nearly all E-W buses north of Bloor terminate at a Yonge subway station. As a result, every major station on Yonge is fed by both eastern and western buses, whereas Spadina subway stations are fed by western buses only.
Shades of this thread/poll from before.
1. Interline DRL with B-D. Alternate trains go across B-D and head downtown. The advantage (political and transit) is many people in Scarborough and Etobicoke would have a single seat trip to downtown. The dissadvantage is scheduling difficulties due to the train conflicts at the Greenwood Wye. It may also make an extension to Eglinton as subway not feasible - but tunnelled LRT is still quite feasible.
2. Avoid Queen and King. To maintain transit during construction, keeping the Queen and King streetcars operational makes sense.
3. Use Richmond/Adelaide. These two streets are close enough to Queen and King that the subway exits to street level would not be far away and connection could be made to both Queen and King stations on both the Yonge and University Lines. The dissadvantage is these streets are not quite straight and have a few jobs in them.
4. One way subway on Richmond/Adelaide. Each street has only one track (i.e. Westbound on Richmond, Eastbound on Adelaide) so the constuction footprint would be relatively small and only close the middle of the road, even at stations with platforms on both sides. This does however mean two locations of construction operations.
5. Shallow tunnel subways. This results in less excavation and easier access for subway customers. The dissadvantage is more potential for conflict with utilities.
6. Utilize railway to connect to Bloor-Danforth. Since subways cannot make 90 degree turns, these corridors provide a nice smooth curve from the Richmond/Adelaide aligment to reach B-D. It does mean that this part of the route may not pass through the most dense areas.
1. I don't get this obsession with one-seat rides. The benefits aren't so great that it's worth what you lose. Depending on location as well, good luck building a grade separated junction.
2/3. Lots of options. Divert around downtown for 3-4 years, split routes, etc. You could even use Adelaide.
4. This is just plain stupid. This is basically the equivalent of doubling the amount of stations you'd need downtown and doubling construction and maintenance costs.
5. Shallow. There's no chance for this downtown. It's too built up and correct me if I'm wrong but this type of tunnel is usually associated with cut and cover construction?
6. Utilize how? It's not exactly problem free, either for an elevated line or if you want to build an underground station anywhere under the rails.
DID YOU READ http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=670156... It is the most detailed DRL proposal I have scene. Also I was a Skyscrapercity page devotee before coming to URBAN TORONTO because TRZ knew almost everything about our rail system and others. I hope he/she has not passed away but I am confident if he was here he could answer your questions sufficently. He really is a transit GURU. Read the proposal its DANG informitive and Good.
TRZ where are you????????????????
1. I don't get this obsession with one-seat rides. The benefits aren't so great that it's worth what you lose. Depending on location as well, good luck building a grade separated junction.
2/3. Lots of options. Divert around downtown for 3-4 years, split routes, etc. You could even use Adelaide.
4. This is just plain stupid. This is basically the equivalent of doubling the amount of stations you'd need downtown and doubling construction and maintenance costs.
5. Shallow. There's no chance for this downtown. It's too built up and correct me if I'm wrong but this type of tunnel is usually associated with cut and cover construction?
6. Utilize how? It's not exactly problem free, either for an elevated line or if you want to build an underground station anywhere under the rails.
Anyway, just because it's detailed doesn't mean it's sensible.