[DB9]

Wasn't that the entire point of Transit City though? To make Toronto more European in essence. And to move away from the towers-in-a-park concept?

The jist of transit city from what I understand was to create a transit oriented mixed used neighbourhood that relies less on cars. The European model is just one idea they drew inspiration from.

Height and towers-in-a-park aren't synonymous anyways. With the right context, especially in special locations like the immediate vicinity of a regional transit hub, extra height and density is warranted.

Towers-in-a-park does seem to plague every SCC development though, which is unfortunate. I had a friend who lived at SCC, and even the idea of walking to a restaurant was unthinkable.

 

[sixrings]

you are making it sound like I'm trying to convince you that the illuminati exists. I presented two government documents showing what the government expects to be built and asked for an explanation to why this would be the one interchange station not to encourage density. If sheppard was ever extended west to the university line it wouldn't see major density other than mid rises because of height restraints from downsview airport. What is the logical explanation for kennedy not seeing development though. Instead you casually dismissed my question with one word, "nimbys." I assume you don't think there are nimbys at yonge and eglinton then.. newsflash there are... but the government keeps letting things be developed. Perhaps the mods are thinking the same thing that I do about the zoning. In which case they too think there has to be a better explanation.

 

[kEiThZ]

The European model is just one idea they drew inspiration from.

They did more than draw inspiration. They basically moved to zoing in support of the idea for their planned LRT corridors.

Height and towers-in-a-park aren't synonymous anyways. With the right context, especially in special locations like the immediate vicinity of a regional transit hub, extra height and density is warranted.

Absolutely. But the idea that people aren't building density because of height restrictions is rather ridiculous. The height restrictions that are in place today (11-25m) along Eglinton today would allow highrises in the vicinity of Kennedy station. Yet, you don't see developers lining up to redevelop the plazas with the Dollarama or the No Frills. That's telling. You need at least that before we can start talking about the SFHs that are on the outskirts of the catchment.

Once again, Kennedy is really not that unusual in this regard. Most of the Bloor-Danforth line is exactly like Kennedy. It's actually Yonge that's atypical for Toronto, with density everywhere. And I put that down to travel time. It's a lot faster to the core along most of Yonge and it's a transferless ride. That was always bound to drive demand along Yonge first.

It'd be nice to see that at Kennedy. But I don't see conspiracy here. I see lack of demand. SCC is actually a much easier sell for a developer than Kennedy. Especially with the subway.

 

[sixrings]

Except that the corridor in question does have an LRT on the way. So it's necessarily going to follow the Transit City Avenue model. The alternative is high density at Kennedy, and not much anywhere else along Eglinton (especially in Scarborough). That's dumb.

And again, there's no evidence here at all that the city is intentionally constraining Kennedy-Eg. Just that restriction haven't moved from what was there before. You can always petition to change that. So why aren't you doing that?



If I do that, nobody is going to call out your conspiratorial bullshit. And blatant disregard for facts. It's too bad the mods let it slide.

why are we living in a either or world. There can be midrises along eglinton corridor with high rises at kennedy. Or are you saying that kennedy would monopolize all the development if we allowed it to go highrise. If that's the case is that not what I am suggesting that the government knows that there are only going to be so many condos built in scarborough so they would rather place them at scarborough town centre.

 

[DB9]

They did more than draw inspiration. They basically moved to zoing in support of the idea for their planned LRT corridors.



Absolutely. But the idea that people aren't building density because of height restrictions is rather ridiculous. The height restrictions that are in place today (11-25m) along Eglinton today would allow highrises in the vicinity of Kennedy station. Yet, you don't see developers lining up to redevelop the plazas with the Dollarama or the No Frills. That's telling. You need at least that before we can start talking about the SFHs that are on the outskirts of the catchment.

If the planners were really keen on following Europe, we wouldn't concentrate the mid-rise block density on a few avenues, and instead all those stable neighbourhoods would be bulldozed all at once for mid-rises. Even now you can't even get a SFH split into a duplex or semi, that's how ridiculously strict the zoning is. The reason why European cities can have the density without the height is the fact that they don't have to deal with large swaths of SFH neighbourhoods in the city. Adding extra height at "key locales" at least partly compensates for the lost of density that won't be realized because Toronto refuses to violate the sanctity of the SFH.

Developers are targeting STC at the moment, because the zoning is already there, they don't have to fight with the city to get the height they want. If I was a developer, why wouldn't I take the path of least resistance? But even then you see proposals and visioning exercises now piling up on Eglinton and Sheppard (e.g. Agincourt Mall & Eglinton Square) that are defiant of the Avenues plan, asking for much more height than what's permitted under the Avenues plan..they're playing the long game, because they know they won't get approval in the short run.

This is why I've said again and again, loosen the height & density restrictions on all 3 hubs (Agincourt, SCC and Eg&Kennedy), and let the private sector decide where to build.

Once again, Kennedy is really not that unusual in this regard. Most of the Bloor-Danforth line is exactly like Kennedy. It's actually Yonge that's atypical for Toronto, with density everywhere. And I put that down to travel time. It's a lot faster to the core along most of Yonge and it's a transferless ride. That was always bound to drive demand along Yonge first.

It'd be nice to see that at Kennedy. But I don't see conspiracy here. I see lack of demand. SCC is actually a much easier sell for a developer than Kennedy. Especially with the subway.

Bloor-Danforth is probably the best example of not what to do, while Yonge is the city's best practises in full display.

I tend to disagree. As my realtor friends have noted, SCC is a tough sell in general - it's one of the least attractive city centres in the GTA, with few of the urban perks, fabric and amenities that other city centres have or is developing. When GO RER is up and running, I'd imagine SCC would look even less appealing, even if that slow milk run train to the BD line is built. SCCers will still be forced to transfer in order to get on GO RER.

 

[kEiThZ]

As my realtor friends have noted, SCC is a tough sell in general - it's one of the least attractive city centres in the GTA

The whole GTA is irrelevant in this thread. Since the comparison here is against Kennedy-Eg. Under a scenario where the subway reached SCC, it's much more attractive than Kennedy-Eg. At that point, it's a GO bus hub, subway terminus, has easy highway access and a gigantic mall nearby.

Now, without a subway, I'd agree with your realtor friends, Kennedy-Eg is more attractive. The transfer is after all a pain in the ass. And people like to live near a terminus.

Developers are targeting STC at the moment, because the zoning is already there, they don't have to fight with the city to get the height they want.

Sure. But going back to the genesis of this tangent, that zoning was not somehow changed to facilitate the SSE as the conspiracy theory runs. SCC has more permissive height restrictions entirely because it was intended that way from the start. With the intention of having more commercial buildings in the environs too.

I agree that Kennedy-Eg should have less restrictions. What I reject is the nonsensical conspiratorial bullshit that the city is purposely holding back Kennedy-Eg to facilitate growth at SCC. Is there any actual evidence of that?

When GO RER is up and running, I'd imagine SCC would look even less appealing

When GO RER is truly operational, living near most subway stations will look less attractive. For the same amount of travel time you can live further away, which means cheaper property or more space for your dollar.

 

[DB9]

The whole GTA is irrelevant in this thread. Since the comparison here is against Kennedy-Eg. Under a scenario where the subway reached SCC, it's much more attractive than Kennedy-Eg. At that point, it's a GO bus hub, subway terminus, has easy highway access and a gigantic mall nearby.

Now, without a subway, I'd agree with your realtor friends, Kennedy-Eg is more attractive. The transfer is after all a pain in the ass. And people like to live near a terminus.

Right now it has 3 of the 4 points you mentioned and it's still not that attractive.STC is a decent regional mall, but even in West Scarborough, Fairview is on our radar as the place to be, not STC. Honestly, I don't see how the subway stop will really change dynamics, given it's way at the end of a very very long subway line (like Kipling)...or SCCers can do the forced transfer at Kennedy.

If Kennedy RER can get people to downtown in less than 20 minutes, in sub-15 minute frequencies, Kennedy&Eg would be a viable option for downtown-oriented commuters to move to.

Realtors based their opinion on the ability to move product.. and they've said it's hard to move STC product, even if you sell it abroad in Asia on roadshows.

Sure. But going back to the genesis of this tangent, that zoning was not somehow changed to facilitate the SSE as the conspiracy theory runs. SCC has more permissive height restrictions entirely because it was intended that way from the start. With the intention of having more commercial buildings in the environs too.

I agree that Kennedy-Eg should have less restrictions. What I reject is the nonsensical conspiratorial bullshit that the city is purposely holding back Kennedy-Eg to facilitate growth at SCC. Is there any actual evidence of that?

I'm not the one who's been debating with you on whether the city has been conspiring to deny growth to Kennedy & Eg to facilitate growth at SCC. I personally don't think the city bureaucrats are up to anything sinister, and their hands are tied by Scarborough's bottom-of-the-barrel politicians. But you have got to admit, the optics look terrible at the moment, and I can understand why someone would think the city is attempting to goose up growth at SCC to justify the SSE.

When SSC first had the permissive height restrictions in place(e.g. Consilium Place and oddly placed Tridel & Monarch condos here and there), GO RER wasn't even on the table. The whole transit picture has changed for the region, but zoning hasn't kept up with reality.

When GO RER is truly operational, living near most subway stations will look less attractive. For the same amount of travel time you can live further away, which means cheaper property or more space for your dollar.

Yes - that's why it really doesn't make sense why Scarborough is wasting all this political capital to build subways. Living further away will become more attractive, and parts of Scarborough adjacent to the RER will be able to effectively compete time-wise with highly desirable neighbourhoods in the inner core of Toronto (imagine commutes less than 1/2 hour to downtown), which is only a good thing for Scarborough.

If Paris RER is anything to go by, it's the absolute game changer for the region.

 

[kEiThZ]

Right now it has 3 of the 4 points you mentioned and it's still not that attractive.STC is a decent regional mall, but even in West Scarborough, Fairview is on our radar as the place to be, not STC. Honestly, I don't see how the subway stop will really change dynamics, given it's way at the end of a very very long subway line (like Kipling)...or SCCers can do the forced transfer at Kennedy.

The 401. Like it or not, it's not like every single person living beside a subway station takes the subway, all the time. The highway is a valuable asset. Even for people who don't use it regularly. Imagine, for example, couples where one drives to work and one takes the subway. SCC becomes a far better proposition than Kennedy-Eg. There seems to be this idea on this forum that every single person works downtown.

Realtors based their opinion on the ability to move product.. and they've said it's hard to move STC product,

Relative to the GTA as a whole or relative to Scarborough or relative to Kennedy-Eg. I don't doubt that SCC is harder to sell than say Yonge. I don't buy for a second that it's harder to sell than the rest of Scarborough though. I can believe it moves slower than Kennedy-Eg today simply because Kennedy-Eg does have limited stock and it's the terminus for the subway. People will pay a premium to avoid the RT and the transfer. In the future? SCC basically becomes 5 mins down the tracks. And a lot of that desire to be at the terminus moves to SCC.

I personally don't think the city bureaucrats are up to anything sinister

Thank you. And this is what I was getting at. I'm sick of ridiculous unsubstantiated conjecture. There's enough contentious issues to discuss as it is. Alternative facts made up in one's mind won't help anything along at all.

GO RER wasn't even on the table. The whole transit picture has changed for the region, but zoning hasn't kept up with reality.

I'd go further and say that we don't even have a cohesive RTP that truly accounts for RER. The city's LRT and subway plans were not adjusted one iota for RER. I suspect a lot of that has to do with the lack of integration between GO and the TTC. Hamfisted as Smart Track is, I supported it for the sole reason that we'll finally get some discussion going on how suburban rail should serve the 416. It's ridiculous for example that some of those extra stops brought on by Smart Track were never included in GO RER to begin with.

Yes - that's why it really doesn't make sense why Scarborough is wasting all this political capital to build subways. Living further away will become more attractive, and parts of Scarborough adjacent to the RER will be able to effectively compete time-wise with highly desirable neighbourhoods in the inner core of Toronto (imagine commutes less than 1/2 hour to downtown), which is only a good thing for Scarborough.

If Paris RER is anything to go by, it's the absolute game changer for the region.

I have been arguing this for years. The whole reason subway is so desirable in Toronto (not just Scarborough) is because it's seen as the regional transit system, inside the 416. If Scarborough had solid suburban rail service nobody would be clamouring for a subway. And LRT would have been a much easier sell as a feeder service for RER. Unfortunately, the general public isn't going to see what GO RER is, for at least another 6-7 years. And that's assuming GO RER survives the next election.

And since nobody has really talked about TTC/GO integration with any real substance, their plans haven't been integrated. And aren't really much discussed. Seriously, outside of this forum how many politicians have you heard pitching an integrated vision of GO and the TTC? Which is what made the selling of LRT really difficult. What LRT proponents should have been selling was that you take the Scarborough LRT and transfer to the RER at Kennedy or you take the Sheppard East LRT and transfer to RER at Agincourt. Instead, they kept banging the drum about not enough ridership to warrant a subway. That only reminds people of the hated transfer. And then gets their backs up because you're arguing that they are not worth the investment. Also, with GO fares being what they are and no credit given when transferring, most people probably can't imagine a future where they routinely transfer between TTC and GO.

 

[DB9]

The 401. Like it or not, it's not like every single person living beside a subway station takes the subway, all the time. The highway is a valuable asset. Even for people who don't use it regularly. Imagine, for example, couples where one drives to work and one takes the subway. SCC becomes a far better proposition than Kennedy-Eg. There seems to be this idea on this forum that every single person works downtown.

For this hypothetical couple, yes maybe SCC is better than Kennedy-Eg, but honestly this couple will move sooner to the Consumers area or Agincourt (take GO RER) before they contemplate SCC. The 401 has terrible bottlenecks between Kennedy and Vic Park.. and when I was commuting by car a while back, I would often try to avoid that stretch of the 401 during rush hour, and just get on at Vic Park.

The issue with the BD line is that there are no major employment hubs between SSC and Yonge/Bloor. It's unlike the Yonge like where you hit 3 major employment centres before you arrive at Union. So for the typical commuter who works in one of these employment centres, unless one of them is really willing to waste oodles of time doing the milk run by subway, SCC isn't really a great option...or they just suck it up and take the dreaded transfer. It's not even a downtown issue, it's more the fact that the Danforth is severely under-developed, and Scarborough is geographically isolated from the area's employment hubs.

Relative to the GTA as a whole or relative to Scarborough or relative to Kennedy-Eg. I don't doubt that SCC is harder to sell than say Yonge. I don't buy for a second that it's harder to sell than the rest of Scarborough though. I can believe it moves slower than Kennedy-Eg today simply because Kennedy-Eg does have limited stock and it's the terminus for the subway. People will pay a premium to avoid the RT and the transfer. In the future? SCC basically becomes 5 mins down the tracks. And a lot of that desire to be at the terminus moves to SCC.

My two cents is that you're way too optimistic on what this subway terminus can potentially do. I don't think it will really sustain any increase in desire. People will get excited, hop on this milk run train and then find out that the commute from hell hasn't really improved (even without the transfer)...that it still takes over an hour to subway to a major employment hub. Of course, SCC's success hinges on the spectacular failure of GO RER. If GO RER is blown up by the PCs after the next election, then yes I'd say you would have a strong case for SCC.

And since nobody has really talked about TTC/GO integration with any real substance, their plans haven't been integrated. And aren't really much discussed. Seriously, outside of this forum how many politicians have you heard pitching an integrated vision of GO and the TTC? Which is what made the selling of LRT really difficult. What LRT proponents should have been selling was that you take the Scarborough LRT and transfer to the RER at Kennedy or you take the Sheppard East LRT and transfer to RER at Agincourt. Instead, they kept banging the drum about not enough ridership to warrant a subway. That only reminds people of the hated transfer. And then gets their backs up because you're arguing that they are not worth the investment. Also, with GO fares being what they are and no credit given when transferring, most people probably can't imagine a future where they routinely transfer between TTC and GO.

This is the point I've been hammering home. Scarborough politicians have been shortchanging Scarborough, feeding constantly into the hysteria of subways, subways, subways.. yet have you ever heard a Scarborough MP or councilor talk up or champion RER or TTC/GO integration? Why aren't they championing it if Scarborough is one of the biggest beneficiaries from this investment??

 

[TheTigerMaster]

This is the point I've been hammering home. Scarborough politicians have been shortchanging Scarborough, feeding constantly into the hysteria of subways, subways, subways.. yet have you ever heard a Scarborough MP or councilor talk up or champion RER or TTC/GO integration? Why aren't they championing it if Scarborough is one of the biggest beneficiaries from this investment??

They're in the business of winning votes, not improving lives

 

[Hopkins123]

The whole GTA is irrelevant in this thread. Since the comparison here is against Kennedy-Eg. Under a scenario where the subway reached SCC, it's much more attractive than Kennedy-Eg. At that point, it's a GO bus hub, subway terminus, has easy highway access and a gigantic mall nearby.

Now, without a subway, I'd agree with your realtor friends, Kennedy-Eg is more attractive. The transfer is after all a pain in the ass. And people like to live near a terminus.

Sure. But going back to the genesis of this tangent, that zoning was not somehow changed to facilitate the SSE as the conspiracy theory runs. SCC has more permissive height restrictions entirely because it was intended that way from the start. With the intention of having more commercial buildings in the environs too.

I agree that Kennedy-Eg should have less restrictions. What I reject is the nonsensical conspiratorial bullshit that the city is purposely holding back Kennedy-Eg to facilitate growth at SCC. Is there any actual evidence of that?

When GO RER is truly operational, living near most subway stations will look less attractive. For the same amount of travel time you can live further away, which means cheaper property or more space for your dollar.

Where even is this over-abundance of available land to redevelop near Kennedy-Eglinton anyway? The area's pretty built up already:

To suggest that we turn this area into the next NYCC level of density to justify terminating the subway there in perpetuity is asking a bit much, IMO.

 

[Elite People]

Why can't Malvern be part if the area?

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Where even is this over-abundance of available land to redevelop near Kennedy-Eglinton anyway? The area's pretty built up already:

Built up where? The to the west of Kennedy Station on Eglinton Avenue are covered by parking lots, greenfields, big box stores (No Frills, Shoppers Drug Mart, etc..), and low density commercial buildings. As we approach Birchmount, we about a dozen apartment blocks, but between them remains an abundance of parking lots and big box stores.

To the east, the only substantial development are two apartment blocks, which are surrounded by a sea of low density residential, parking lots and big box retailers.

 

[Rainforest]

They're in the business of winning votes, not improving lives

That statement suggests that the voters are stupid and don't cast their votes in the way that improves their lives ..

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Where even is this over-abundance of available land to redevelop near Kennedy-Eglinton anyway? The area's pretty built up already:

For reference, here are the allegedly "built up" lands. If this is "built up", then Toronto is screwed, since we must not have a single non-build up land outside of the Portlands

And for reference, North York Centre, which I suppose is built up in a similar fashion to Kennedy/Eglinton.