Toronto Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport | ?m | ?s | Ports Toronto | Arup

"intelligent Communities" is an another promising vision from Waterfront Toronto which can add thousands of new highly paid jobs in downtown.

http://www.waterfrontoronto.ca/our_waterfront_vision/innovation/_intelligent_communities
Västerås, Sweden built an open-access fibre-optic network in 2000. Within just two years, more than 600 new companies set up shop in this lakeside city west of Stockholm. Today, Västerås has earned accolades for its innovation, economic development and telecommunications. By building an intelligent community on its waterfront, Toronto will be among only a handful of global cities well-acquainted with the value of an open-access ultra-advanced communications network.
 
picard102 said:
ftfy
Click to expand...

except condos were specifically ruled out from Ontario place, and the province is now going to make it a park.

Cinnamon, Thats currently being planned for the East Bayside area. the office space there is being aimed at tech companies and all the housing will receive 100mb/s internet.
 
innsertnamehere said:
except condos were specifically ruled out from Ontario place, and the province is now going to make it a park.
Click to expand...

That is not quite how I understand it....the east end of the parking lot is being made to a park but I believe some residential use is still being considered for the balance of the park.
 
Cinnamon said:
Waterfront Toronto's vision and revitalization project aims to reduce the traffic load in the area, not to increase it. After spending $1.3b public fund and years of hard work, I don't think Waterfront Toronto is after TPA for funding of road improvements.
Click to expand...

On Queens Quay. They have no effort to reduce traffic on LakeShore, Gardiner, or Bathurst are the primary way of feeding the airport.

Nor did I restrict it to roadway improvements. Very few people flying from the island airport are taking 2 large bags of luggage with them. Heck, many don't even have carry-on.

How about a covered walkway to the nearest TTC 509 stops and instead of a Porter Shuttle (AC customers use it too), include a TTC fare with flights?

Or, perhaps some thought to making it easier to navigate union station to the 509 platform with a rollarbag?
 
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Well, we did mention burying or tearing down the Gardiner but you seem to think that drivers from elsewhere have a case against it.
Click to expand...

I have long been an advocate for the burial and tolling of the Gardiner. We need a Boston Big Dig type effort here and tolls to pay it off. I do think drivers from elsewhere would complain. But I have never, ever said that should stop such an effort. If you believe I have said otherwise, go through my post history and pull out the quote.

AlvinofDiaspar said:
I mean, let me frame it another way - would those from Rexdale or Malton give one hoot about foisting more car traffic downtown if a) it benefits them and b) they could? I have a feeling they wouldn't either. So what would that make it - socioeconomic popularism?

AoD
Click to expand...

The suburban residents have been screaming for real rapid transit for a while. All so they can avoid driving downtown to begin with. Also, look at how much parking charges have increased in the last decade. How much complaining have you heard from 416 suburban residents about that? Clearly not in their interest. But they put up with it.
 
Last edited:
Cinnamon said:
the five-minute transit commitment
Each community will be fully served by transit, and the plan focuses on streetcars with right-of-way and light rail. Virtually every residence will be within five minutes of a transit stop, minimizing the need for vehicular traffic.


Currently I don't need a car, like many others living in the same building with me, our parking is 30-40% vacant. If we can achieve and maintain a "healthy urban living" as Toronto Waterfront promises, I don't see any reason to move to suburbs and spend 3 hours of my life everyday for commuting.

Remember, if you promote use of cars, people will use it. Look at exhibition place, almost 50% of an " prime recreational" area is paved and dedicated for parking:

And yes, we have tons of traffic there, good luck trying to get in.

Look at downtown of Munich, close to the main rail station, heart of the city. You will not be able see any parking, and traffic is much easier. Message is clear here: leave your car at home.
Click to expand...


1) Five minute transit commitment is bunk. It's damn easy to accomplish in the core if they are counting streetcar stops. Seriously. The area isn't all that big. The existing ROW covers it all. Really, they aren't doing much. It's a throwaway promise. Pleasant though...I take the Bathurst streetcar on the ROW everyday.

2) That promise is irrelevant to traffic because most downtown residents still own cars. Why? Because the lack of proper regional or even city-wide transport means that when you do leave the core, you either spend 2 hours on transit or take the car and get there in 45 mins. Building better transit in the core won't change that one bit.

3) Are you seriously going to compare to Europe? Have a look at the area near London City, and Canary Wharf in particular. A Canadian developer did most of that too. And they've done more than Waterfront Toronto will achieve in several lifetimes. With a high-yielding airport to boot. Your comparison to Munich is spurious at best. European cities have a different history and a different built form. How many buildings the size of the TD Centre are there in Munich's core? And how frequent is their S-Bahn service into Hauptbahnof? And how many U-Bahn lines connect there? You are going to pit that against a handful of streetcar stops in TO? Sorry. You can't have one without the other. You can't talk about getting rid of cars without massive regional investment in transit (and that means regional transit): a concept that eludes most people in the GTHA, including many on this forum. And that also includes solid connections to key nodes like the airport. Munich has several lines that connect to its airport. And they are on the regular zone fare system. We will have the UPE that will charge $15 a pop and does nothing for everybody who lives East or north of the core (BBTCA will still be more convenient). When Toronto commits to building a transit system like Munich with solid access to nodes like Pearson from everywhere, I'll gladly support the closure of YTZ. Till then? Sorry, I don't like tossing away active, revenue-generating infrastructure.
 
Autoshare lets a lot of people not own cars, it lets them rent the car when you need it for the odd suburban trip but don't really need it on a day to day basis.
 
innsertnamehere said:
Autoshare lets a lot of people not own cars, it lets them rent the car when you need it for the odd suburban trip but don't really need it on a day to day basis.
Click to expand...

I've met several people in my condo who reverse-peak commute. Some use cars. Autoshare wouldn't work for them.

But again, traffic and congestion are regional issues. A lot of traffic is inbound from the burbs. More transit in the core isn't going to get rid of that traffic.
 
I said it was for non daily users. I'm not advocating for complete elimination of garages, I'm just saying that "most" residents downtown don't need to own cars.
 
innsertnamehere said:
I said it was for non daily users. I'm not advocating for complete elimination of garages, I'm just saying that "most" residents downtown don't need to own cars.
Click to expand...

Yet, most residents in the core do own cars. What you perceive they need and what they perceive they need are different. And at the end of the day, they are quite a few people willing to fork out dough to keep a car while living in the core. There's a reason for that.
 
innsertnamehere said:
Explain how new developments have car ratios well below 50%, and often selling even less than what they provide?
Click to expand...

Parking spots are often very expensive add ons. I think I saw one that was almost $35 000+ just to have a parking spot. Not many people would be willing to pay for that.

Also isn't there a City bylaw which states the maximum number of parking spaces permitted?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top