karledice said:
It is not up to the LPAT to raise the tax on gas. And they cannot raise it within this particular neighbourhood this project is being proposed.
Raising tax is a separate issue and has nothing to do with this particular project

We are not discussing whether or not it's better to use cars vs. public transit in society. I think it is better to use transit but the reality is what's happening in Liberty Village.
We are discussing what the proposed density will do to this neighbourhood which is part of approval decision evaluation of the project like shadow, wind, heritage assessment etc.

And assuming the body evaluating this project for permits doesn't have the authority to make those macro changes like taxation on cars/gas in Toronto
Click to expand...

All correct.............but...............

If you don't build parking into the buildings, this is not an area with permit parking available as an alternative, you will get very few owners/tenants who drive.

That would, therefore, be an efficient way to manage that issue.

I do agree, IF the mistake were made to include significant parking, then vehicle access will have to be managed.

But let's mitigate that through actions which preclude the problem.
 
Last edited:
karledice said:
It is not up to the LPAT to raise the tax on gas. And they cannot raise it within this particular neighbourhood this project is being proposed.
Raising tax is a separate issue and has nothing to do with this particular project

We are not discussing whether or not it's better to use cars vs. public transit in society. I think it is better to use transit but the reality is what's happening in Liberty Village.
We are discussing what the proposed density will do to Front St W which is part of approval decision evaluation of the project like shadow, wind, heritage assessment etc.

And assuming the body evaluating this project for permits doesn't have the authority to make those macro changes like taxation on cars/gas in Toronto
Click to expand...
So what you're saying is that you're trying nothing and are all out of ideas? I have friends who live in King West and drive to work in the core. I don't cry for them, and nor should you. These same folks would walk or take transit but they have free parking at home and work, pay no congestion charge, and can get door to door in ~10 minutes. If you don't really care, what's the incentive to change?
 
ProjectEnd said:
So what you're saying is that you're trying nothing and are all out of ideas? I have friends who live in King West and drive to work in the core. I don't cry for them, and nor should you. These same folks would walk or take transit but they have free parking at home and work, pay no congestion charge, and can get door to door in ~10 minutes. If you don't really care, what's the incentive to change?
Click to expand...

You cannot make a macro decision like taxing all cars in the Province/City based on a few anecdotal stories from your friends

I also know a single mom that drives from Richmond Hill to downtown to work cause she has 2 kids and it would take her 1h15 mins to get to work vs. 30 mins drive
The tax would impact her too!

There's nothing to try because the LPAT has no authority to increase cars/gas tax
Would you like them to go to the city/province to ask for EVERYONE to be taxed in Toronto/Ontario so this project can minimize the car traffic onto the street?
 
Northern Light said:
I think; IF some form of development goes ahead here, these sites really need to be parking-free.

That will dictate that the vast majority of prospective residents will not own cars/drive; the few who do will either use carsharing, or reserve a spot off-site, for periodic use.

It's much more practical to limit the desire to drive at the design stage than try to shift behaviour once owners/tenants who drive move in to the area.
Click to expand...
This is key: by not incorporating parking we send the signal to prospective buyers that cars are not recommended as a way of getting around. This also gives us a fighting chance of pushing for faster, more frequent transit in the area.
 
This is the last big tract of available space left for a downtown park. I'm vehemently opposed to one square inch of being turned over for buildings. We can't ever un-do this if it's allowed to happen. This project is one of those once in a century projects that change the face of a city,. The City, Province, and Feds need to put their foot down and cough up the money. We should not cave in and accept this.

The City has a lot of power but behaves like it has no leverage. Impose a levee on every single development in Toronto and use the proceeds to fund Rail Deck Park and other projects. There's not a thing developers can do about it. It's not like they're going to stop building here. The City needs to grow a backbone and say this is how it's going to be, this is the price of doing business in our city, and it's NOT up for discussion.

If developers don't like it, so what? The City's failure to do this suggests that they're too cozy with the development industry. If they allow Rail Deck Park to be compromised, perhaps it's time to show these city staffers the door.
 
allengeorge said:
This is key: by not incorporating parking we send the signal to prospective buyers that cars are not recommended as a way of getting around. This also gives us a fighting chance of pushing for faster, more frequent transit in the area.
Click to expand...
Exactly. The residents will be walking, biking or taking transit. Therefore NOT adding to vehicular street congestion.
 
isaidso said:
This is the last big tract of available space left for a downtown park. I'm vehemently opposed to one square inch of being turned over for buildings. We can't ever un-do this if it's allowed to happen. This project is one of those once in a century projects that change the face of a city,. The City, Province, and Feds need to put their foot down and cough up the money. We should not cave in and accept this.

The City has a lot of power but behaves like it has no leverage. Impose a levee on every single development in Toronto and use the proceeds to fund Rail Deck Park and other projects. There's not a thing developers can do about it. It's not like they're going to stop building here. The City needs to grow a backbone and say this is how it's going to be, this is the price of doing business in our city, and it's NOT up for discussion.

If developers don't like it, so what? The City's failure to do this suggests that they're too cozy with the development industry. If they allow Rail Deck Park to be compromised, perhaps it's time to show these city staffers the door.
Click to expand...
👏👏👏:)

Also someone else proposed a great idea of a land exchange: the developers help build the park here and the city gives them some land in the East Waterfront or wherever available for density at a discounted rate to make up for their margins.
Everyone wins
 
Last edited:
isaidso said:
This is the last big tract of available space left for a downtown park. I'm vehemently opposed to one square inch of being turned over for buildings. We can't ever un-do this if it's allowed to happen. This project is one of those once in a century projects that change the face of a city,. The City, Province, and Feds need to put their foot down and cough up the money. We should not cave in and accept this.

The City has a lot of power but behaves like it has no leverage. Impose a levee on every single development in Toronto and use the proceeds to fund Rail Deck Park and other projects. There's not a thing developers can do about it. It's not like they're going to stop building here. The City needs to grow a backbone and say this is how it's going to be, this is the price of doing business in our city, and it's NOT up for discussion.

If developers don't like it, so what? The City's failure to do this suggests that they're too cozy with the development industry. If they allow Rail Deck Park to be compromised, perhaps it's time to show these city staffers the door.
Click to expand...
karledice said:
👏👏👏:)

Also someone else proposed a great idea of a land exchange: the developers help build the park here and the city gives them some land in the East Waterfront or wherever available for density at a discounted rate to make up for their margins.
Everyone wins
Click to expand...
Yawn.
 
Every time I see a "Toronto is getting" BlogTO headline my blood pressure goes up a notch. Often or even perhaps usually the things they declare Toronto is "getting" (the gross acquisitive connotations of that word itself drive me up the wall) aren't even set in stone or reliably even a good bet to be happening at all. Unclear how the management of BlogTO thinks this kind of thing is ethical publishing at all. It actively creates disinformation and bad discourse. They should be ashamed of how they run their business and reflect on their choices around what they will do for attention and what they are adding to the world.
 
ProjectEnd said:
Mods: can we ban BlogTO links forever??
Click to expand...

Much as many of their pieces have ......problems with them...............

They are, from time to time, the only 'source' on a subject.

I don't think a ban would serve us well.

People should just link sparingly, either because it's the first source on something; or for appropriate mocking.

Obviously their content is always to be taken with a large grain of salt.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top