[vic]

I have read reference to it being the case, a substitute for what now exists, which is sinfully under-utilized and not available to the public. I see it used every time the fire alarm goes off at Bishop 'Rocko for stacking students outside.

Is it a shame to lose that green space? Well, yes, but it's a crime for it not being used. God knows a lot of the kids I see at Rockos could certainly use the exercise. That building, btw, is owned by the TSB, and leased to the Catholic board.

I was hoping that it would be a public space that could be used by anyone, but also used by the school during the day and for events etc. I think David Crombie Park (Esplanade) has a similar arrangement. Under-used, fenced-off, inaccessible sports/park land should be avoided.

 

[steveintoronto]

I was hoping that it would be a public space that could be used by anyone, but also used by the school during the day and for events etc. I think David Crombie Park (Esplanade) has a similar arrangement. Under-used, fenced-off, inaccessible sports/park land should be avoided.

It has to move that way. I was about to qualify that with "for secondary schools"....but even with primary schools, with caveats, the space is too precious to be left unused.

Your point would be one for the 2280 team to hear though, and I agree. That 'sports space' must be able to be used for whomever, but it must be of a size and configuration to allow team sport playing, (which may mean high netting surrounding the plot) and that, like ice rinks, must include the public at large...again...*with caveats* such as the ability to book time periods of use, insurance, liability releases, etc.

 

[vic]

Interesting to see how this property has changed since 1947. Rail yard / industry. Big Box / parking. School....
https://www.toronto.ca/city-governm...rchives/whats-online/maps/aerial-photographs/

 

[Jacob Lisgar]

I think they are off to a good start, but traffic will definitely be a nightmare here. I think it will be interesting to see how the affordability aspect plays out as they already own the site. A lot of developers claim they need to charge high prices because of the high cost of land, (galleria mall was purchased for $71 million, it was a 12 acre site). In the case here they bought the land and buildings over 20 years ago for a few million dollars so the land cost is not in the equation and Should give much more flexibility in terms of affordable pricing.

 

[someMidTowner]

I think they are off to a good start, but traffic will definitely be a nightmare here.

The project is located right next to a subway station and a UPX station. If people still choose to drive, their traffic headaches shouldn't be anyone else's concern.

 

[Jacob Lisgar]

The project is located right next to a subway station and a UPX station. If people still choose to drive, their traffic headaches shouldn't be anyone else's concern.

There is already people living in the neighbourhood that drive and use the existing road network that will be affected by the new residents and workers. Planners can dream all they want about a car free society and a city where dog owners actually pick up after their pets but there are some realities that exist. People will probably continue to use cars. Businesses will continue to use trucks and vans to make deliveries and surface transit will probably increase and add to congestion. Oh, and dog shit will be everywhere and the day the new park opens the local councillors office will be flooded with complaints.

 

[innsertnamehere]

There is already people living in the neighbourhood that drive and use the existing road network that will be affected by the new residents and workers. Planners can dream all they want about a car free society and a city where dog owners actually pick up after their pets but there are some realities that exist. People will probably continue to use cars. Businesses will continue to use trucks and vans to make deliveries and surface transit will probably increase and add to congestion. Oh, and dog shit will be everywhere and the day the new park opens the local councillors office will be flooded with complaints.

well aren't you just an optimistic fellow.

 

[vic]

Is there any indication in any of the renderings where the entrance(s) to parking garage(s) will be? Or where service vehicles, deliveries, etc. will go? Seems well-hidden in the video. They only seem to show a few cars trickling through the new roads, and the "ride share loop". The existing Loblaws and LCBO (and Zellers when it was open) bring many cars to that site. The school too has a parking garage under the field. I doubt that many fewer people will drive there, and realistically, not everyone working there will be car-free either.

I like the nearly car-free utopia presented here (I'm already living the dream), but I think they're just hiding where all the traffic will go.

They should go all-out and make ZERO resident parking. Only car-sharing and temporary spaces on-site. It could work here.

 

[steveintoronto]

There is already people living in the neighbourhood that drive and use the existing road network that will be affected by the new residents and workers. Planners can dream all they want about a car free society and a city where dog owners actually pick up after their pets but there are some realities that exist. People will probably continue to use cars. Businesses will continue to use trucks and vans to make deliveries and surface transit will probably increase and add to congestion. Oh, and dog shit will be everywhere and the day the new park opens the local councillors office will be flooded with complaints.

And so it is the case in New York and most of Europe and Asia. Oddly, neither dog shit or car shit is a problem as a result. There just isn't the road capacity for more cars in that area, not that there is in most areas of large cities, but especially not there. The only real demand will be for Loblaws, but even there, as a shopper just pointed out to me half an hour ago, that lot is mostly empty during the day. That's a massive waste of land.

Let's flip this over, as drivers refuse to look at the costs of their habit: How about the developer pledges to *subtract* costs of owning a car and reduces rent and leases accordingly for those who don't use them? Millenials are already 'driving' in that direction. They don't want a car, don't need a car for most of the time, and when they do, they rent one. And we're all ahead.

Car-loving Calgary considers a 167-unit condo – with no parking
KERRY GOLD
SPECIAL TO THE GLOBE AND MAIL
PUBLISHED APRIL 24, 2015UPDATED JUNE 5, 2017
Construction began this week on a new bike lane pilot project that will run through downtown Calgary. And in less than two weeks, council will decide whether to give the green light to the city’s first car-less condo project, a 167-unit tower – and not a parking stall on site.

It’s part of the city’s effort to offer alternatives to the long-standing car culture and move toward more transit-oriented development. There’s a shift to a denser, more walkable city under way, says planning chief Rollin Stanley, even if progress is slow.

“I’ve worked in four major metro areas in North America, and this is the one where it’s still a new idea,” he says. “It’s been a bit of a challenge for some people to understand. They say, ‘Bike lanes will slow down cars.’ But a lot more people live downtown now, and streets are also for people. It’s a mindset change.

“The point I like to make is 52 per cent of the property tax base in this city comes from downtown. Not just the people who live here, but people who work there. That means we have to invest in things like cycle lanes and pedestrian sidewalks.”
[...]
Developer Joe Starkman got the idea to build a car-less condo project when he and his wife offered their daughter a car to get around in while at university. She asked him, “‘Why on earth would I want a car?’” he recalls.

Studies have shown that twentysomething millennials don’t care about cars as previous generations have. Mr. Starkman hired marketers to survey Calgary millennials and discovered that about 25 per cent didn’t have driver’s licences, and 50 per cent didn’t own a car. He struck upon an idea – condos targeted to young people who don’t drive.

“We clued in this would be a good project when I mentioned it to my development lawyer,” says Mr. Starkman. “He said, ‘You guys are nuts – no one is going to buy that,’ and that’s when I knew we were onto something. He’s from the boomer generation, and when you’re a boomer, you’re out of touch with what the kids are doing.”
[...]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/real-estate/calgary-considers-a-no-parking-condo/article24110385/

Calgary! But not in Toronto? I blame it on all the oil wells....

Millennials and seniors start moving into car-loving Calgary's first parking-free condo
ANNALISE KLINGBEIL, CALGARY HERALD
Published on: April 7, 2017 | Last Updated: April 7, 2017 5:47 PM MDT

Developer Joe Starkman thought Calgary’s first condo without a single stall for tenants’ automobiles would attract millennials.

Between the complete absence of parking and the millennial-friendly perks that come with the purchase of a unit — think an Ikea gift card for furniture, a new urban bicycle and credit for car-sharing service Car2Go — you can’t blame him.

Residents started moving into the history-making, parking-free N3 development on Monday and while the majority are under the age of 35, Starkman has been pleasantly surprised at just who will be living in the 167-unit tower in the up-and-coming East Village.

“Generally, it’s a younger group moving in,” said Starkman, with Knightsbridge Homes. “But the other anomaly we had is we ended up with a whole bunch of seniors.”

Starkman said he’s heard from older buyers who don’t drive and are keen to live close to a transit station, amenities including a yet-to-be-opened grocery store, and a diversity of ages.

“One actually said to me, ‘I’m tired of living with all of these old people,” he said.

“It leads you to think maybe we need more of a mix, instead of us putting all of our seniors in seniors homes overlooking the grass growing out in the suburbs.”

Whether young or old, the people who will call home a 465-square-foot one-bedroom or a 625-square foot two-bedroom inner-city condo are living in a piece of Calgary history.

When city council in notoriously car-loving Calgary unanimously approved the 15-storey parking-free condo tower in May 2015, it was a first for the city.

Under normal Calgary rules, a tower of N3’s size would require about 100 parking stalls and Starkman estimated because of the water table needs in the area, each would have cost $50,000.

The absence of underground parking stalls allowed Knightsbridge to finish the development quicker than a typical build and offer a lower price point. [...]

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local...-car-loving-calgarys-first-parking-free-condo

 

[steveintoronto]

well aren't you just an optimistic fellow.

I question his world experience. Oddly, I'm sure the same complaint was made about where to store the horses and hay before the cars took over.

 

[67Cup]

@steveintoronto, merde is certainly a problem in Europe, at least in France! Mrs 67 and I had the privilege of living in La belle but merde ridden France for about eight months, in 2015-16. Keeping an eye out for what was underfoot was a constant challenge and one of the very few negatives of our experience. We adopted a tactic from a tellingly titled novel, A Year in the Merde, more or less the anti Peter Mayle novel. The authour suggests warning of canine biohazard by saying, “Mercredi.” That was fine, although it confirmed the opinion of our fellow villagers that “Les Canadiens” were imbéciles. They didn’t even know the days of the week!

Of course, the villagers already knew that about me from the time when a gentleman tried to explain to me in the midst of a crowded butcher’s shop, in a combination of broken English and Français, how capons are created. “Zay cut off ze balls!” Etc. With scissors gestures.

But the wine in the cave cooperative could be purchased for as little as 1.65 euros a litre if you took your own container. And warm croissants fresh from the boulangerie in the morning! But where was I? Oh yeah, bien sûr, merde is a problem.

 

[steveintoronto]

@steveintoronto, merde is certainly a problem in Europe, at least in France! Mrs 67 and I had the privilege of living in La belle but merde ridden France for about eight months, in 2015-16. Keeping an eye out for what was underfoot was a constant challenge and one of the very few negatives of our experience.

Errr...I'm an EU national, have a brother who's a horticulturalist in the Libourne area of Bordeaux Region. I've spent time with him there, extensively cycled there and I've lived for decades on and off in the UK. Dogs are allowed in stores, bars and pubs, and it's not a problem. Perhaps we live in an entirely different reality?

But let's not get off the point this revolves around, because the initial statement is 'bollocks', to tie into your string of thought:

Oh, and dog shit will be everywhere and the day the new park opens the local councillors office will be flooded with complaints.

He entirely overlooked the Hand of Satan and the End of the World, along with epidemic hangnails. Dirty ones at that. All with dog poo deeply ingrained in them.

Tell me Mr Cup, is that a problem in Calgary?

Kiefer MacKenzie lives downtown and gets around using bikes, Calgary Transit or car-sharing services. He loves the urban lifestyle, but he says Calgary’s public transportation system limits where he can go and when, and most business in the downtown core close when commuters go home.

That’s why MacKenzie is excited about a proposal in Calgary’s rapidly growing East Village for a parking-free condo development, which is going to city council for final approval on Monday. The car-free condo may have raised eyebrows in an automobile-loving city when originally proposed, but it appeals to MacKenzie, a 25-year-old senior sustainability consultant, and an increasing number of millennials like him who are embracing a lifestyle with minimal driving.

“I’m really comfortable driving. I actually enjoy it,” he said. “I just don’t feel it’s necessary or should be necessary. It takes a lot of a time and expense to own a car, so I personally don’t.”

The project, put together by development company Knightsbridge and referred to as N3, is the first of its kind in Calgary. It offers no on-site parking for its tenants, and a limited number of visitor parking stalls. Instead, the purchase of a unit comes with a free membership to car-sharing service Car2go with a $500 credit, and a new bicycle. Without the cost of constructing a parkade, units are expected to be offered for a price at least $20,000 lower than other condos in the area.

A similar project in Toronto was well received, and community support for this one is strong so far. However, bylaws in Calgary mean that Knightsbridge would need an exception from council to go ahead with N3’s construction.

MacKenzie believes N3 could fill a problematic gap in Calgary’s housing market. He lives with his girlfriend, 25-year-old Irene Chung, in an small apartment that he says can feel crowded. Before he heard about N3, he was seriously considering moving to Vancouver because he couldn’t find his ideal living situation here.[...]

http://www.connellymanagement.com/2015/05/11/car-free-condo-proposal-suggests-urban-cultural-shift/

I've Googled extensively on this, large positive, glowing accounts in Calgary's and others press, but even adding different forms of "shit", "merde""doggy-poo" and just plain old "excrement" shows no hits.

Perhaps I'm using the wrong search parameters? Be my guest and show some reference please.

As for Toronto, I'd overlooked this:

No Parking condo only slightly flawed
Basement full of cars won’t be missed but replica façade seems at odds with bold tower above it

By CHRISTOPHER HUME Star Columnist
Fri., Nov. 14, 2014

Even before it was a hole in the ground, the condo on the site of the old Royal Canadian Military Institute at 426 University Ave. was famous. Its celebrity had nothing to do with the usual reasons — height, location or architecture — but parking. Other than nine spots for deliveries, it has no parking.

Incredibly, city planners objected when it was first proposed. Though it is a pioneering project if for no other reason than its lack of parking; civic bureaucrats exist to enforce rules. The rules in Toronto set out the number of parking spots a condo must have. These days it’s down from one per unit to .6 or .5.

Though few of us dwell on such arcane matters, the effects of parking requirements can be debilitating. For instance, they are one of the main causes for the lack of mid-rise development in Toronto. In these small projects, there often isn’t enough room — physically or economically — to include parking and make a profit.

The city makes a big deal about the need for density and walkability, which might have led one to assume a condo without parking would be welcomed with open arms. No; in fact planners advised city council not to approve the project. Its stand was a lesson in civic hypocrisy:

“To assume a residential development of the project's scale might be totally car-free runs counter to expert study and experience,” municipal staffers argued. “Although there are many households in the downtown without cars, it would be highly unlikely to find 315 of them permanently concentrated in one building.” [...]

https://www.thestar.com/life/homes/2014/11/14/no_parking_condo_only_slightly_flawed.html

I'm trying for hits on Google now for the above with "dog poo" added in. So far, nothing. I'll keep trying...

 

[67Cup]

Well, that’s quite a rant in response to what I intended to be a good tempered and even, I hoped, a mildly amusing reminiscence about life in a French village, where, yes, there was lots of merde on the pavement. I had no intention of ruffling your feathers that way.

I’m not sure why you are grilling me about Calgary. I did live there for four months in 2017, but I don’t pretend to be an expert on Calgary attitudes. I would have said it is a car oriented city but I am glad and a little surprised to hear about a car free building. I hope it works. By the way, I lived on the fringe of downtown on 12th Ave SW and walked to work.

 

[ponyboy]

This project made it on the cover of the metro daily

 

[steveintoronto]

Well, that’s quite a rant in response to what I intended to be a good tempered and even, I hoped, a mildly amusing reminiscence about life in a French village, where, yes, there was lots of merde on the pavement. I had no intention of ruffling your feathers that way.

I’m not sure why you are grilling me about Calgary. I did live there for four months in 2017, but I don’t pretend to be an expert on Calgary attitudes. I would have said it is a car oriented city but I am glad and a little surprised to hear about a car free building. I hope it works. By the way, I lived on the fringe of downtown on 12th Ave SW and walked to work.

Well then, we can both agree that
@Jacob Lisgar said: ↑

Oh, and dog shit will be everywhere and the day the new park opens the local councillors office will be flooded with complaints.

is completely without merit?

In all fairness to you, and perhaps your post being taken the wrong way, a number of persons are looking to diss this project, not on any reasonable basis (and there are a number of facets that are worthy of great discussion) but when it comes down to dissing it on alleged copious quantities of "dog shit", then yes, I react.

As much as this project cannot be perfection, it's a welcome change, a *necessary change* for them to involve the community so much in their decision making. That's not only "neighbourly", it's good business practice. And it's good city building.

These folks are reaching out at a time when their parent and sole shareholder, the Weston Group, is taking a lot of flak. It's a good move, and as long as they stay on this tack, I'm more than willing to work with them. Done as they state, this is good for this neighbourhood, it's good for Toronto...and it's good for dogs. And most I know around here are scrupulous in picking up after the dogs in their care.

That's a hell of a lot more than can be said for most smokers and their butts. Bring on the healthy change! (And there's a good suggestion conscientious landlords love anyway: Make most of the residential towers smoke-free)