Redistribution of Federal Electoral Districts 2012

[Krago]

So, what do you think?

Downtown Toronto - Option 1 - Federal

Downtown Toronto - Option 1 - Provincial

Downtown Toronto - Option 2 - Federal

Downtown Toronto - Option 2 - Provincial

Downtown Toronto - Option 3 - Federal

Downtown Toronto - Option 3 - Provincial

[Krago]

Here is (was?) my alternative plan to incorporate David Marit's objections into the new Saskatchewan map in a way that would benefit the NDP.
 

Saskatchewan - Alternative

Saskatoon - Alternative

Regina - Alternative

[Krago]

Yeah.. why did they name the riding "Vaughan--Woodbridge" when Woodbridge would have been fine?

Well, the Ontario Commission was never too good with names (Simcoe-Grey, Nepean-Carleton, Oak Ridges).

[Krago]

Saskatchewan remap makes sense. Of the downtown Toronto suggestions, 2 seems like the obvious choice, though 3 is hilarious. The old proposal before revisions was way better, though.

Spadina-Rosedale must still be pretty strongly NDP on the proposed map, no?

Yes, option 3 is hilarious. Any reason you drew that one up, Krago?

Community of interest.  If you're going to have a silk stocking district in Toronto, why not have it (vaguely) resemble a stocking?  And when I transposed the 2011 federal election results on R-B-H, it is almost a three-way tie, with the NDP on top!

It's strange.  When I first came up with the idea, I thought it looked ridiculous.  But the more I consider it, it's not too bad.  Plus the other two seats are almost ideal.

[Krago]

Here is my alternative plan for Alberta.  It was tough to add six seats while maintaining existing riding boundaries as much as possible, all while keeping the populations within the range mandated by the incredibly anal Alberta Commission.  In the end, all ridings were within 5% of the provincial quotient except for the three Northern seats, which were within 10%.

Northern Alberta - Alternative

Southern Alberta - Alternative

Suburban Edmonton and Calgary - Alternative

Edmonton - Alternative

Calgary - Alternative

[Krago]

Saskatchewan remap makes sense. Of the downtown Toronto suggestions, 2 seems like the obvious choice, though 3 is hilarious. The old proposal before revisions was way better, though.

Spadina-Rosedale must still be pretty strongly NDP on the proposed map, no?

Yes, option 3 is hilarious. Any reason you drew that one up, Krago?

Community of interest.  If you're going to have a silk stocking district in Toronto, why not have it (vaguely) resemble a stocking?  And when I transposed the 2011 federal election results on R-B-H, it is almost a three-way tie, with the NDP on top!

It's strange.  When I first came up with the idea, I thought it looked ridiculous.  But the more I consider it, it's not too bad.  Plus the other two seats are almost ideal.

Might be a good fit for the US, but would be laughed at if proposed to the commission.

**cough**  Flamborough-Glanbrook  **cough**

[Krago]

Here is my alternative plan for Alberta.  It was tough to add six seats while maintaining existing riding boundaries as much as possible, all while keeping the populations within the range mandated by the incredibly anal Alberta Commission.  In the end, all ridings were within 5% of the provincial quotient except for the three Northern seats, which were within 10%.

Northern Alberta - Alternative

Southern Alberta - Alternative

Suburban Edmonton and Calgary - Alternative

Edmonton - Alternative

Calgary - Alternative

I like how you kept Red Deer together, however I can't say I'm happy with your Calgary map. I never understood why the Airport is not used as a boundary. The NE riding has two communities divided by the airport.

I agree that using the Airport (Deerfoot Trail) as the boundary would be a better idea, except for the ripple effect it would have on neighbouring ridings.  By keeping Harvest Hills Blvd as the boundary between Calgary-Nose Hill and Calgary Northeast (now Calgary Skyview), the numbers allow you to use the Bow River as a riding boundary all the way from Calgary's western city limit to its southern one.  Moving the line to Deerfoot Trail would create two additional Bow-crossing seats.

[Krago]

Here are two more options that add Davenport and St. Paul's to the mix and join Forest Hill with Rosedale.


Downtown Toronto - Option 4 - Federal

Downtown Toronto - Option 4 - Provincial

Downtown Toronto - Option 5 - Federal

Downtown Toronto - Option 5 - Provincial

[Krago]

Here is my alternative plan for Alberta.  It was tough to add six seats while maintaining existing riding boundaries as much as possible, all while keeping the populations within the range mandated by the incredibly anal Alberta Commission.  In the end, all ridings were within 5% of the provincial quotient except for the three Northern seats, which were within 10%.

Northern Alberta - Alternative

Southern Alberta - Alternative

Suburban Edmonton and Calgary - Alternative

Edmonton - Alternative

Calgary - Alternative

I like how you kept Red Deer together, however I can't say I'm happy with your Calgary map. I never understood why the Airport is not used as a boundary. The NE riding has two communities divided by the airport.

I agree that using the Airport (Deerfoot Trail) as the boundary would be a better idea, except for the ripple effect it would have on neighbouring ridings.  By keeping Harvest Hills Blvd as the boundary between Calgary-Nose Hill and Calgary Northeast (now Calgary Skyview), the numbers allow you to use the Bow River as a riding boundary all the way from Calgary's western city limit to its southern one.  Moving the line to Deerfoot Trail would create two additional Bow-crossing seats.

I had created this a while ago- it's probably in this thread somewhere but:



Notice how the Bow River is the boundary all the way across the city, and I still used the airport as the boundary.

That looks like a good plan.  Here's my take on it.

Northern Calgary - Alternative 2

[Krago]

I will be meeting with Olivia Chow's office on Thursday to discuss the new map. 

This may help with your discussions:

Downtown Toronto Mother Tongue map

[Krago]

The Chinese figure includes Cantonese, Mandarin, Taiwanese and 'Chinese' (presumably Chinese not included elsewhere).  It doesn't include Hakka, Fukien or Tibetan.

ETA: I've adjusted the map to include Hakka and Fukien under Chinese, and to split the Under 5% category between 1% to 5% and Under 1%.

[Krago]

What about Shanghaiese, isn't that listed as well?

I've already changed it twice.  Screw 'em.

[Krago]

This may help with your discussions:

Downtown Toronto Mother Tongue map

Thanks Krago.  Really does cut the Chinese community in half.  BTW these are dissemination areas?

I believe they are.

The underlying 2011 Census data is at the DA level.  On my original map the lines indicated DA boundaries, but I've updated the map (and the link) to overlay the colours with the StatsCan road network.  This should make it easier to determine the boundaries of the different language communities.

And I've updated the data to include Shanghaiese - as you knew I would!

[Krago]

Here are two more downtown Toronto scenarios to consider.

• The ridings have roughly equal populations
• Forest Hill and Rosedale are placed in the same seat
• Kensington/Chinatown is kept together, as is the St. Lawrence neighbourhood
• Davenport (which really should change its name) would become even more Portuguese
• Carolyn Bennett would really REALLY hate it

[Krago]

Here are two more downtown Toronto scenarios to consider.

• The ridings have roughly equal populations
• Forest Hill and Rosedale are placed in the same seat
• Kensington/Chinatown is kept together, as is the St. Lawrence neighbourhood
• Davenport (which really should change its name) would become even more Portuguese
• Carolyn Bennett would really REALLY hate it

This is much better, I think. Forest Hill-Rosedale is an extremely natural seat and should be kept more or less this way as the others are changed.

I would keep the southern border of Davenport and expand it in the north instead, though (to prevent University-Oakwood from being so elongated, and take the southern addition to Davenport and put it in University-Oakwood instead).

Alternatively, is it possible to combine Chinatown in the inland seat instead, and have the condo seat push into Toronto Centre to take in the Garden District? That involves splitting up downtown, but I don't think that's so bad. Basically, changing the focus from north-south districts (as historically) to east-west districts. Maybe a Toronto-Fort York seat and a University-Chinatown seat (maybe Wellesley-Dundas?) and then something inland (maybe just called Oakwood? Or Bloor-Oakwood?).

I wish I had the data to more easily fiddle around with.

The proposed (and current) riding of Davenport has 102,360 people.  The Oakwood-Vaughan neighbourhood in the NW corner of St. Paul's (west of Winona) has 10,980 people, so adding that area to the existing riding would throw off the population balance in downtown Toronto.

However, here's an alternative for you to consider, based on your later comments.

Benj Alternative - Federal

Benj Alternative - Provincial

[Krago]

OK I have two requests:

Alterations within the 3 downtown ridings:

- Take all of the area west of University between Dundas and College into Spadina-Fort York
- Move all of Spadina-Fort York east of York St./University Ave. to Toronto Centre, including the islands
- Move the territory between Bay and Yonge, College and Charles to University-Rosedale

Your proposal would leave University-Rosedale with 86,000 people and Toronto Centre with 107,500.  Would you want to move 'The Village' (north of Carlton, west of Jarvis - 12,400 people) from TC to UR to equalize the numbers?

Return of the earlier Mount Pleasant proposal with minor adjustments on the TC/Mt. P. boundary:

- Move the Mt. P/TC boundary to Dundas west of Yonge and to Charles between Yonge and Jarvis/Mount Pleasant, and follow the Bloor/Rosedale Valley line as in the previous proposal
- Leave Trinity-Spadina and St. Paul's with Bloor St. boundary as in the first proposal
- Fix the northern spillover of Mount Pleasant by reinstating Toronto North (but with the name of Don Valley West) and Eglinton-Lawrence retaining the CNR boundary on the west but with Avenue Rd. above Lawrence

And now, here's something we hope you'll really like!

King Alternative - Federal

King Alternative - Provincial

[Krago]

Ian Scott was barely re-elected in 1990 in St. George-St. David.  Afterward, he spent most of his time at his law firm and became known as the honourable member for St. Gowling-St. Strathy.

By the way, St. Paul's began as a downtown Toronto riding, and slowly worked its way northward to Forest Hill.


Hatman, did you just move from Ottawa to PEI?  Was Mike Duffy on your flight?

[Krago]

St. Paul's: LIB +2,900
Toronto Centre: LIB +1,600

[Krago]

Quick, someone who isn't just a random American send this to Olivia Chow! I want to feel in some slight way partially responsible for something in Canadian politics.

I just forwarded the Benji Alternative to Olivia via FB.

So King of Kensington, what was their response? was their any idea if Olivia will speak out against the final report at the procedure committee?

Ya, i read that she's "Considering" it... sad, she will be a greatly missed MP. But makes for some fun speculation as to who will run in those three ridings for the NDP now.

The Benji Alternative?  What about the Krago Alternative!

[Krago]

If you're doing requests, why not do a map with 4 skinny ridings? Give them some historical provincialeque names.

I would love to see this! it would be like the 60's-70's all over again!

You people are insatiable!

Skinny Alternative - Federal

Skinny Alternative - Provincial

My riding names are boring, so please rename them to your collective hearts delight.

[Krago]

Why is Davenport at 94,000 in "Krago's King alternative"?  I don't think it needed to be changed at all from the first proposal - never understood the fuss about the Winona to Oakwood pocket by Andrew Cash.  

Check again, Your Majesty.  It is now fixed.

[Krago]

Here's my final (?) proposal for downtown Toronto:

• leave Davenport and St. Paul's alone
• keep all of Kensington/Chinatown in Trinity-Spadina
• unite the University area within TS
• use Queen St (mostly) as the northern boundary of Fort York (Condoland!)
• keep Regent Park and Rosedale in the same riding, as they share a community of interest

Option Whatever - Federal

Option Whatever - Provincial

[Krago]

Here's my final (?) proposal for downtown Toronto:

• leave Davenport and St. Paul's alone
• keep all of Kensington/Chinatown in Trinity-Spadina
• unite the University area within TS
• use Queen St (mostly) as the northern boundary of Fort York (Condoland!)
• keep Regent Park and Rosedale in the same riding, as they share a community of interest

Option Whatever - Federal

Option Whatever - Provincial

... Regent Park and Rosedale share a community of interest? being what?

Presumably, having been in the same seat before. It's a nice least-change map for creating a condo seat, but the Toronto Centre riding continues to be a mash of areas with no cohesive identity.

Which is the biggest problem with TC, it's rather have a massively changed map if it addressed putting/keeping real communities of interest together (Ethnic, linguistic, cultural...). Thats why i prefer the Benji map that Krago put together.  

It was a joke!  Rosedale and Regent Park don't have anything in common!  Though it's true, they have shared the same riding - both federally and provincially - since God knows when.

Downtown Toronto is filled with distinctive communities, and when you need to get 100,000 people in a riding, you're going to have some strange bedfellows.

Olivia Chow would adore the 'Benji' map.  Now all you have to do is convince Jonah Schein to give up an area where the NDP won by 700 votes for an area where they lost to the Libs by 900 - a 1,600 vote swing in a riding he carried by 1,414!

[Krago]

Reading through the NB report... how many redistributions til they're forced (assuming a stable overall number of seats) to abolish one rural riding and create Moncton West - Riverview and Moncton East - Dieppe? It looks like, though obviously stepping on many people's toes, that would have been the clean and logical thing to do even now, and would probably have happened if Canada used a smaller tolerance.

Riverview is anglophone. Dieppe is francophone. Moncton is split: http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/geo/map-carte/pdf/thematic/LANG/2011-98313-004-305-013-01-00-eng.pdf. You will see the francophones are more in the east end of Moncton. The Moncton Census Metropolitan Area, shown in that map, has 138,644 people, 1.85 quotients. Add another 11,590 exurban residents and you have two ridings. There are 9,351 people in and around Sackville who have to be in Moncton East--Dieppe--Sackville. That leaves Shediac and northward to be determined, depending on where the line is drawn in Moncton.

For what it's worth, here's my New Brunswick proposal.  It creates Wilf's Moncton-Dieppe riding, while maintaining ridiculously equal district populations around the province.

[Krago]

Kent County NB has 30,833 people, and is entirely within my proposed Beauséjour seat.  The New Brunswick provincial quotient is 75,117.

If you want to have a Miramichi seat close to the provincial average, without incurring the legal wrath of les Acadiens, then you follow Hwy 108 west to the Tobique River, and Hwy 625/620 southwest to Mactaquac.

Sunbury Royal?  Meh.