News   Jun 18, 2024
 1.1K     0 
News   Jun 18, 2024
 636     0 
News   Jun 18, 2024
 1.9K     4 

Riverdale

Skeezix;669218I said:
was simply taking issue with your earlier assertion that Langley is the only affected street.

Well, it's the only directly affected street, and drivers have several alternatives. If they're coming from the south - Queen, for instance - they may choose to go directly up Logan rather than turning onto it by going along either Simpson or Langley from Carlaw.

Yes, nfitz, there used to be a level crossing at Gerrard and Pape at one time.
 
Well, it's the only directly affected street, and drivers have several alternatives. If they're coming from the south - Queen, for instance - they may choose to go directly up Logan rather than turning onto it by going along either Simpson or Langley from Carlaw.

Yes, nfitz, there used to be a level crossing at Gerrard and Pape at one time.

If other streets experience more traffic, then they are directly affected as well. It is silly to suggest otherwise.
 
Here's something I don't "get" about Riverdale (North of Gerrard):

Most of the houses seem to be built c.1880-1905, and seem to be "Victorian" in design. There is then a layer of square, bulky "Edwardian" homes, built maybe 1905-1920. But then, for some reason, there are a bunch of arts & crafts homes that seem to be post 1920 - ones that look they could belong in East York or something. But, by the 1920s, wouldn't Riverdale proper have been completely built out?

The Prince Edward viaduct would have added a significant population to the area east of the Don, though the 1920s "Archie Bunker semis" are further north and east. North Riverdale seems to be primarily Edwardian 1905-1920 housing, and Vics more characteristic in South Riverdale.

It would be interesting to find historic population figures for Riverdale (i.e. the area annexed by the City of Toronto in 1884) between say, 1890 and 1930.
 
The Prince Edward viaduct would have added a significant population to the area east of the Don, though the 1920s "Archie Bunker semis" are further north and east. North Riverdale seems to be primarily Edwardian 1905-1920 housing, and Vics more characteristic in South Riverdale.

It would be interesting to find historic population figures for Riverdale (i.e. the area annexed by the City of Toronto in 1884) between say, 1890 and 1930.

That all makes sense.

It is a bit odd that the housing stock south of Gerrard is more desirable (well, most would prefer a Victorian over an Edwardian) but North Riverdale is more highly gentrified. Maybe the schools in North Riverdale (Pape Ave, Withrow, and Frankland) play a part?

As well, there is some infill housing North of Gerrard that looks (to my untrained eyes) to be much more recent than even 1920.

Here is an example on Simpson: https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=si...=X0I5pEk4c6LBDBgbAqBRNA&cbp=12,184.48,,0,1.06

Another example on Ingham: https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=in...f_zSkM_Lni6pNjhE7lcr6Q&cbp=12,206.38,,0,-4.67

And a last on on Riverdale: https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=ri...=2cWzRLMkpOGj31d5n6XX6A&cbp=12,343.5,,0,16.28
 
That all makes sense.

It is a bit odd that the housing stock south of Gerrard is more desirable (well, most would prefer a Victorian over an Edwardian) but North Riverdale is more highly gentrified. Maybe the schools in North Riverdale (Pape Ave, Withrow, and Frankland) play a part?

Up until relatively recently, South Riverdale hosted a lot of plants -- Colgate Avenue was a soap factory, e.g., and the now-abandoned rail spurs were in use. So, it was a VERY tough 'nabe as recently as the '50s or '60s, maybe even '70s. North of Gerrard didn't have the factories, even if it was working class.
 
Tract 69: 1985 dwellings, 1185 built before 1920, 390 built between 1920 and 1945
Tract 70: 1640 dwellings, 550 built before 1920, 350 built between 1920 and 1945
Tract 71: 1310 dwellings, 770 built before 1920, 360 built between 1920 and 1945

http://www12.statcan.ca/census-rece...&Temporal=2006&THEME=69&VID=0&VNAMEE=&VNAMEF=

So according to StatsCan, 50.7% of North Riverdale dwellings were built before 1920 and 22.3% were built between 1920 and 1945.
 
Up until relatively recently, South Riverdale hosted a lot of plants -- Colgate Avenue was a soap factory, e.g., and the now-abandoned rail spurs were in use. So, it was a VERY tough 'nabe as recently as the '50s or '60s, maybe even '70s. North of Gerrard didn't have the factories, even if it was working class.

This piqued my interest and led me to this article: http://neighbourhoodchange.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/11514483047301273596.pdf , "The Factors Inhibiting Gentrification in Areas with Little Non-market Housing: Policy Lessons from the Toronto Experience".

In it, South Riverdale's stalled gentrification was contrasted with North Riverdale's full gentrification. Basically, the reasons North Riverdale gentrified since the 1970s and South Riverdale stalled, were:

- Security of Tenure (most people owned their homes)
- Housing Stock not Conducive to Gentrification (houses too small, and in rough nick, in the South)
- The Maintenance of Industrial Employment Lands (factories that held on well into the 1980s)
- Nuisance Uses and Environmental Externalities (pollution from the factories)
- Reliance on Ethnic Housing Finance Capital (the East Chinatown effect)

I thought this was a great footnote on South Riverdale, and it's earlier roughness:

The streets (‘slums’) of South Riverdale
were notorious enough to earn a full chapter
in the 1970 book The Underside of Toronto
(Crysdale, 1970).

...after 90 years as a working-class neighbourhood,
“now ... lawyers and their like are reclaiming
Grant Street’s high ground from the east end
rabble”. Brown highlights potential social
tensions by contrasting the styles of the
existing poorer residents, represented by the
Groves family (a “second generation welfare
family” with “gap-toothed smiles” and the
“last vestige of anti-bourgeois vitality on
Grant Street”) and the in-coming gentrifi ers
who divide the street into “us” and “them”.
“Us”, according to one new resident, includes
“people on the street who like each other
and talk to each other”. “We care. We care
not only about property values, but about
pleasantness and the visual, the aesthetics”
(Brown, 1986, p. 98). Brown also details how
one resident named John had the city remove
public benches at the foot of Grant Street,
so that “drunks” who might rest on them
would no longer “create an eyesore that might
have devalued everyone’s property” (p. 100;
see also Gillmore, 1999).

So according to StatsCan, 50.7% of North Riverdale dwellings were built before 1920 and 22.3% were built between 1920 and 1945.

I had no idea North Riverdale was built out so late.
 
Last edited:
The NIMBYs, who seek peace and quiet on Queen Street East, are against The Real Jerk from getting a liquor licence at their new location in the new Streetcar condo. Of course, Queen and Broadview is an oasis of tranquility and princesses like Dawn Howat need their beauty sleep.

Toronto Star: Real Jerk eatery’s new fight: Residents oppose liquor licence


Published on Sunday December 23, 2012

Donovan Vincent
Staff Reporter

The fight between the Real Jerk restaurant and its landlord was a nasty public tussle that ended with the eviction of the popular east-end Toronto eatery earlier this year.

Owner Ed Pottinger and his wife, Lily, promised to sell their jerk chicken and rotis at a new spot, but that’s now stalled over a liquor licence dispute.

The Pottingers want to sign a lease to move into the ground floor of a stylish six-storey condo a few blocks west of their former stand-alone building at Queen St. E. and Broadview Ave.

Their plans to sell alcohol, as they did at their former location, are on hold because 40 residents in the condo are challenging the licence application. The condo has nearly 70 units.

...

“I also believe that our property values will decrease with a bar on our main floor,’’ resident Dawn Howat wrote.

“My priority is to live in a peaceful place where I can go to bed at 10 p.m. without disturbance, so that I can get to work the next day. If I can’t sleep here, I can’t live here,’’ Howat said, adding “a liquor licence does not make sense at this location.’’
 
The NIMBYs, who seek peace and quiet on Queen Street East, are against The Real Jerk from getting a liquor licence at their new location in the new Streetcar condo. Of course, Queen and Broadview is an oasis of tranquility and princesses like Dawn Howat need their beauty sleep.

Toronto Star: Real Jerk eatery’s new fight: Residents oppose liquor licence

I think that's slightly unfair ST. However, that space was clearly designed for a cafe (given the deck to the west). Also, there's another relatively noisy thing right there called the DVP. If she bought despite that, she should be OK with a restaurant.
 
I think that's slightly unfair ST. However, that space was clearly designed for a cafe (given the deck to the west). Also, there's another relatively noisy thing right there called the DVP. If she bought despite that, she should be OK with a restaurant.

Not unfair, IMO. When you buy a condo on Queen East at the DVP, in a building that was clearly built for streetfront retail (with that side patio as you mention), you can't complain about a restaurant moving into that space. Most restaurants sell alcohol. Where was the due diligence?

One point I've heard (but don't quite subscribe to) is that there's an unspoken issue. What if, for example, it was another "pub in a box" like the one that replaced The Real Jerk? What if it were a bistro?

In any case, this is a danger to vibrant streets, when precious condo owners block anything interesting from moving into their retail units.
 
Last edited:
In any case, this is a danger to vibrant streets, when precious condo owners block anything interesting from moving into their retail units.
There should be careful they don't get what they ask for.

There's some kind of restriction on restaurants, etc., on the south side of Queen between Kingston Road and Woodbine in all those new condos. And as a result, the entire 5-blocks is always half-vacant and lifeless. I heard is was something about parking concerns, but ironically there's better parking along that strip of Queen East than everywhere, with a Green P lot behind each building.

Sometimes over-active citizens are their own worst enemy.
 
I posted this in the restaurants comings and goins thread, but thought I'd mention it here. Ice Lounge at the northeast corner of Danforth and Carlaw has its windows papered over. Not sure if it is gone-out-of-business, or is simply going to renovate. I'd assume the former, except it has never seemed that busy over the years (thus the local comments about it being a front for something), so maybe they are simply redoing the space - it was very dated.
 
I always thought it was a money-laundering operation. Or a hugenormous tax write-off. Or both.

The lawyer I lived next door to on Bain said Ice was a drug den. There used to be a canary yellow Ferrari with a 'handicapped' sticker that used to park right outside all the time. It made me laugh every time I saw it. THAT's thumbing your nose at the law!
 

Back
Top