M
Mark Dowling
Guest
The problem with building stuff directly over TTC stations is possibly one of property rights - apparently there is all sorts of property paperwork needed for PATH. There's also the problem of disruption to service at Bayview from the construction and who pays for any damage occurring.
Furthermore, TTC and development are two things councillors can interfere with at the same time which is like "meddling squared".
Basically any new subway stations should have a development built concurrently (if you can't make it pay on day 1 there shouldn't be a station there) and knock-out walls for future adjoining ones/mini-PATHs. They probably didn't do that on Sheppard because Lastman et al wanted North Yorkers to think you could have single family houses 2-car driveways and a subway and none of those nasty high rises. The residents there are starting to find out that the City doesn't keep its word (because it couldn't and shouldn't)
My ideal subway development would be part commercial and especially include a daycare (priority to metropass holders?) - this would remove a reason for people to avoid transit because they must drive to the daycare.
Furthermore, TTC and development are two things councillors can interfere with at the same time which is like "meddling squared".
Basically any new subway stations should have a development built concurrently (if you can't make it pay on day 1 there shouldn't be a station there) and knock-out walls for future adjoining ones/mini-PATHs. They probably didn't do that on Sheppard because Lastman et al wanted North Yorkers to think you could have single family houses 2-car driveways and a subway and none of those nasty high rises. The residents there are starting to find out that the City doesn't keep its word (because it couldn't and shouldn't)
My ideal subway development would be part commercial and especially include a daycare (priority to metropass holders?) - this would remove a reason for people to avoid transit because they must drive to the daycare.