News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto Year-End Poll: Vote on the Best Buildings of 2024, presented by Sapphire Balconies
 2.5K     8 
News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto's Social Media Presence Skyrocketed in 2024
 1K     2 
News   Dec 20, 2024
Mattamy Homes Records A Year of Accomplishments
 1.9K     0 

The Future of City-Owned Golf Courses in Toronto

picard102 said:
Adjacent to Dentonia golf course are:
Donora Park has a playground.
Dentonia Park has a baseball diamond and a soccer field.
Maryland Park has tennis courts and a playground.
Click to expand...

Wrong side of Victoria Park Avenue; a major street that most young children won't cross on their own; and a significant distance from the highest density, lowest income communities in the area, at Teesdale Place and Cataraqui Crescent; along with various rental buildings on Pharmacy and Danforth.

Maryland Park is ~1.3km away
Donora is 1.4km away.

Dentonia is at least a bit closer, depending on which amenity you're drawing the line to; though still, ~800m by the most efficient route.

picard102 said:
Prairie Park has tennis courts.
Click to expand...

I don't recall mentioning tennis courts, which are very low uptake among children/youth and in the lower income community.

picard102 said:
Leyton Tot Lot has a playground .
Click to expand...

This?

1641923451700.png


I don't think so......

Not to mention, its ~1km from Teesdale

picard102 said:
Oakridge Park has a soccer field.

If the argument is that there needs to be more, there is plenty of space available to add more without necessitating changes to the golf course.
Click to expand...

Oakridge Park is a nice facility, if small, but ~900M away.

Additionally, across 2 major roads minimum.

*****

Most of the spaces above, if not all, would be further from Catarqui Crescent, some by more than 1km.

*****

Approved plans for this area have long called for a substantially expanded Madelaine Park, which you omitted; as well as expanding Oakridge.

Neither has ever happened as this area doesn't have a lot of political muscle.
 
Last edited:
Committee has just voted.

They nixed the idea of shrinking Dentonia; and specifically directed that the course remain 18 holes.

They did, however, direct that Parks find a way to put the trail through notwithstanding that directive.

The vote was unanimous; including Councillor Layton.

There were were a few other motions, not overly impactful (essentially directing staff to do what they are doing anyway) such as moving to open cross-country ski or ice skating trails at
various courses in winter.

****

In a word, disappointing.
 
Northern Light said:
Committee has just voted.

They nixed the idea of shrinking Dentonia; and specifically directed that the course remain 18 holes.

They did, however, direct that Parks find a way to put the trail through notwithstanding that directive.

The vote was unanimous; including Councillor Layton.

There were were a few other motions, not overly impactful (essentially directing staff to do what they are doing anyway) such as moving to open cross-country ski or ice skating trails at
various courses in winter.

****

In a word, disappointing.
Click to expand...
Wow, so absolutely nothing of relevance came out of these studies and discussions. Why was I hoping for the bare minimum?
 
Northern Light said:
In a word, disappointing.
Click to expand...
I think 2 things were key factors.
1. Covid threw a wrench into the timing. Golf is booming like never before so the status quo became easy to justify.
2. The municipal courses have a wider appeal than we thought.

I would consider myself more on the pro golf side (though I think there is a lot to improve on), but even I was surprised at the vocal support the courses were getting. A lot of the working class retirees have nowhere else to go so the support was very intense. There isn't a single, specific, alternative with broad support. Perhaps golf will cool off in the next few years, but it will be tough to make anything happen now that the city is making profit again.
allengeorge said:
Cutting the course was the way…

Which is why I’m so confused by your assertion that both sides got what they wanted.
Click to expand...
I recently had the privilege of playing golf in Scotland. Courses there, even semi private ones, are open to the public for walking. Pedestrians keep to the paths and golfers are a little more well rounded in their understanding of golf safety. That said they don't have trees on the links courses so all of the sightlines are wide open. It wouldn't be that difficult to allow course access on trails and provide the appropriate safety measures where needed.
 
Ward8 said:
I recently had the privilege of playing golf in Scotland. Courses there, even semi private ones, are open to the public for walking. Pedestrians keep to the paths and golfers are a little more well rounded in their understanding of golf safety. That said they don't have trees on the links courses so all of the sightlines are wide open. It wouldn't be that difficult to allow course access on trails and provide the appropriate safety measures where needed.
Click to expand...
The first course i ever played in Scotland was the world famous Turnberry (when it was well regarded before "he" bought it) and thought it charming that on one of the great courses of the world (and every course I have played there since) you regularly see people walking their dogs, talking to golfers and sharing the space.

There is an art to walking a golf course while it is in use.....my lot backs on to a golf course and I walk it regularly...either to go to their clubhouse resto for lunch/early supper or to use their driving range...it sure beats driving around the block to get there. As long as you are aware of where the golfers are, and do not walk in front of them/in their path...all is fine.

I have to say, I am not familiar with Dentonia (other than I know "of it") so not sure how the thing is laid out but I can't believe it would uniquely be a course that is unwalkable by visitors.
 
In respect of Dentonia, a hypothetical path was conceptualized back in 2017; but to my knowledge, never ground-truthed in terms of what work would be required, and at what cost.

That particular hypothetical was not predicated on shrinking the course per se; though there was a sense that some holes would have to be reorganized.

The challenge is to build a viable path, without cutting down swathes of trees, or building several bridges across the creek; and managing to keep pedestrians/cyclists safe, while not interfering w/play.

Can it be done? I think so; but its certainly more challenging with all 18 holes still there, and a comparatively small course.
 
Talking about the future of publicly owned golf courses in a time of a housing shortage and homelessness crisis is a very needed one but relevant question.......................why is this being done in the transportation and infrastructure section?
 
At least part of the conversation around golf courses centers around the impediments they present to the trail network.
 
ssiguy2 said:
Talking about the future of publicly owned golf courses in a time of a housing shortage and homelessness crisis is a very needed one but relevant question.......................why is this being done in the transportation and infrastructure section?
Click to expand...
No housing on flood plains. Use this map at this link to confirm.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top