Toronto Spadina Subway Extension Emergency Exits | ?m | 1s | TTC | IBI Group

AlvinofDiaspar said:
I would think it is harder - tiles (except grout) and panels are smooth and can be treated to reduce grime adherence. Not so sure about regular concrete (I mean, just how many cases of good concrete cleaning have we seen - particularly in the context of the TTC?)

re: terrazzo - labour intense to set up - probably even more so than tiling.

AoD
Click to expand...

I believe the rationale, other than simply saving the cost of tiling was that the bare concrete 'hides' the brake dust better, and therefore reduces the need for cleaning.

The TTC has multiple excuses....(ahem, reasons) for not wanting power-wash trackside walls.

First, they claim they have to shut the power down so that cleaners can operate from track level; and that this is a logistical hurdle.

Then, they note that 'track time' must be booked.

They won't let non-TTC staff do the cleaning, and have various claimed that this is too labour-intensive and expensive.

I've also heard the excuse (ahem reason) trotted out that they the MOE gave them trouble at some point due to the chemical soup going into the track-level storm drains and thereby the storm sewer system.

****

Considering that they did carry out a trial run of cleaning the trackside walls from the Island platform ( @ St. George, I believe) .......the storm drain issues seems false.

It would also establish the feasibility of not booking track time or having to turn off the the third rail, and/or isolating the turn off to only the affected section of track.

Personally, I always thought they should just have a work train that was set up like a carwash, with big brushes, water tanks w/hot water w/soap and a rinse treatment, and you could, if so desired, set up a suction system under the car that would take most of the dirty water back and allow it to be treated off-site.

****

The trackside walls need proper finishes.
 
This by the way is the same logic as painting the sections of the station ceilings over the tracks black.

It hides the brake dust.

And that reduces the need for repainting (they never did clean the ceilings, just paint right over the brake dust.

Does anyone know why it isn't feasible to significantly reduce the brake dust?

Couldn't there be some under-car suction that captures most of it in filters?

Assuming one can't design a brake that throws off materially less dust.
 
So to be clear - we hate the exterior designs because they're too fancy and hard to maintain...
(Should have spent less, not wasted money on pointless aesthetics)

...and we hate the interior designs because they're too utilitarian and spartan?
(Should have spent more instead of saving money on something functional but unattractive.)
 
TJ O'Pootertoot said:
So to be clear - we hate the exterior designs because they're too fancy and hard to maintain...
...and we hate the interior designs because they're too utilitarian and spartan?
Click to expand...

It's not a binary the way you have suggested it - it's not "hate", it is the suggestion that some stations are overbuilt relative to the amount of passengers that will realistically be served.

AoD
 
Hopkins123 said:
If there's any doubt about the viability of the Downsview Park Station, here's what will surround it within the next 10 years:

renwilliambakernorth.jpeg


Downsview Park is one of the last large parcels of land Toronto has left that can be developed upon. Definitely worthy of a stop.
Click to expand...

Honestly had no clue these densities were planned for the station. But I remain skeptical, since GTA plans for high density surburban areas have a history of failure.
 
how so? most of them developed in the last 20 years have been successful, if rather slow to roll out. Places like Downtown Markham, Vaughan, etc. are happening, just on a rather slow pace.

Then of course there is North York, which is arguably the most successful suburban intensification project on the continent.
 
innsertnamehere said:
how so? most of them developed in the last 20 years have been successful, if rather slow to roll out. Places like Downtown Markham, Vaughan, etc. are happening, just on a rather slow pace.

Then of course there is North York, which is arguably the most successful suburban intensification project on the continent.
Click to expand...

Do we know what were the employment intensification targets for NYCC when it was established, and has it met those targets?
 
Perhaps it's time to contact the media to have them investigated and prod the TTC and Metrolinx about where all the money for public art has gone.
 

Attachments

  • 2016-09-23 2-57-23 PM.png
    2016-09-23 2-57-23 PM.png
    106.3 KB · Views: 764
TheTigerMaster said:
Do we know what were the employment intensification targets for NYCC when it was established, and has it met those targets?
Click to expand...

DonValleyRainbow said:
400 residents and jobs combined per hectare by 2031 is the target. Metrolinx's Mobility Hub profile says that it has reached 117 people/ha and 130.5 jobs/ha as of the end of 2015.
Click to expand...

salsa said:
These were the targets that were used to justify the Sheppard subway, vs what actually happened. Full document: https://swanboatsteve.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/201103transittechnologytable.pdf


View attachment 86776
Click to expand...

Thanks. NYCC seems on track to ready its target of 400 residents + jobs/ha, but still well off the original target of 93,000 jobs by 2011.

I recall a planner recently mentioning that not a single one of our centres in Toronto had met their growth targets, including NYCC and Eglinton-Yonge. Their growth has been largely residential - not the coveted commercial growth. Naturally I'm quite skeptical of claims that new transit infrastructure is justified because it will bring jobs intensification to the suburbs. fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.
 
It's true they've missed their job targets and that's always the trick.
Part of what they missed, I think, is that they're planing for a CITY but it's part of a larger region. So there have been plenty of new jobs outside of downtown, but largely in 905 centres. There are all sorts of reasons - from lower taxes to free parking - that account for that. Why open a office in North York when you can get a beautiful, cheap business park along the 404 in Markham?

NYCC and Yonge-Eg are very successful neighbourhoods and NYCC is a particularly impressive transformation; minus the jobs. Obviously Scarborough hasn't managed even the residential development. On the Yonge subway thread I've repeatedly pointed out that (residential) intensification there is virtually a sure thing because if nothing else is clear it's that the market will build condos along the city's main street wherever they can. I don't think it's a coincidence that the largely successful centres have been the ones that are, well, central, on an existing corridor. The trick to creating a successful node - whether it's at Yonge/7 or Jane/7, is the jobs.

You may be right that we'll all get fooled again but NYCC was planned in the 70s/80s. VMC and Downtown Markham date to the 90s and 2000s. They were also planned in a totally different market and under a much stronger regional planning regime (i.e. none existed until 10 years ag0). The way planners think (and councils, to a lesser extent) is totally different than it was a generation ago. It's not a guarantee things will be different this time, but it provides enough reasons to think people have learned from past mistakes and that no outcome is a foregone conclusion.
 
From this link.

As part of its overall strategy to enhance Toronto's business climate, the City continues to reduce its tax rates for commercial, industrial and multi-residential properties to an approved target of 2.5 times that of the residential tax rate. The City expects to reach this targeted tax ratio for small business in 2015 and for all other non-residential properties in 2020.
Click to expand...

The property taxes will not be lower in Vaughan compared to Toronto by 2020. I expect that some sort of parking tax or fee will be required for all commercial parking spaces in Ontario, because of more fuel efficient vehicles, hybrids, and electric vehicles becoming available (which makes reliance on a gasoline tax less available as a revenue source).
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top