Toronto Bloor & Dufferin | 122.35m | 37s | Hazelview | Turner Fleischer

[88drums]

The data used in the computer models that estimate what traffic a new project will generate is based on observation of existing conditions, it's not created out of thin air.

42

Of course it's annoying when passive observers write off models they don't understand. Most criticism of shadow studies is particularly groan-worthy.

But in the case of more complex models of human behaviour, it's also unfair to write off legitimate scientific curiosity like West End Boy's. After all, existing conditions aren't tomorrow's conditions, and the assumptions and parameters underlying these models are inherently uncertain, and can quite easily be biased to favour a given conclusion -- sometimes unbeknownst to the modellers themselves.

I don't know about this model in particular, but given substantial near-term uncertainty both locally (cycling and transit infrastructure nearby, the future of Uber) and on a larger scale (driverless cars filling the roads, cultural shifts in car sharing), I'd bet my bottom dollar that there's plenty about this model that's up for debate.

 

[interchange42]

Few people would be more aware of the changing trends and potential futures discussed for urban transportation that those working at the companies creating these reports. Agreed, there are always biases that creep into the reports, but then the City is there to review the traffic report and check it against their rules and their perception of the situation. Where a developer may have a transportation agenda, or with the City may have a particular one for an area, I'm more inclined to be concerned about the policy behind the changes… but otherwise, for routine proposals (even large ones), I am not as inclined to worry about the formulas being used.

I also believe that in the odd situation where the experts are wrong and traffic chaos ensues, those affected make incremental change until the system is rectified. That might mean switching modes (more transiting or carpooling or participating in active transportation, or simply working from home), or it might also mean a more expensive response that requires infrastructure of some kind. The amount of change presented by any one project though can typically be predicted closely enough that infrastructural changes can be foreseen.

All I know is, a Relief Line extension to the west will be need to be studied as soon as the first phase is settled upon.

42

 

[sunnyraytoronto]

I'm just looking through the submission docs, and wondering...

In the transportation study part 1, on pg 34, I think it's predicting 240 cars heading out during the peak hour. Does this seem low to anyone else? I know the study is saying with access to transit there will be fewer cars on balance, anecdotally I think downtown condo owners drive more than people would think.

There's a reason why they're only predicting 240 cars heading out during AM Peak,.... for 2,219 residential units,....

When I looked through the architectural drawings, I was like,... huh? only P1 & P2 parking level,... where are P3, P4, P5 parking levels????

Few people would be more aware of the changing trends and potential futures discussed for urban transportation that those working at the companies creating these reports. Agreed, there are always biases that creep into the reports, but then the City is there to review the traffic report and check it against their rules and their perception of the situation. Where a developer may have a transportation agenda, or with the City may have a particular one for an area, I'm more inclined to be concerned about the policy behind the changes… but otherwise, for routine proposals (even large ones), I am not as inclined to worry about the formulas being used.

Ok, let's look at the City's rule then,... this development proposal has only 912 actually 648 residential parking spaces for 2,219 residential units of which 70 Bachelor, 1210 1-bedroom, 794 2-bedroom and 145 3+bedroom

City of Toronto Zoing By-law 569-2013 Residential Parking Requirement
http://www.toronto.ca/zoning/bylaw_amendments/ZBL_NewProvision_Chapter200.htm
But summary here:
http://canadianparking.ca/will-that-be-a-parking-space-for-the-new-condo-or-something-more-useful/

Downtown Core: 70 Bachelor = 21, 1210 1-bedroom = 605, 794 2-bedroom = 636 and 145 3+bedroom = 145 Total Residential Parking Required: 1407
Avenues with Rapid Transit (Subway): 70 Bachelor = 42, 1210 1-bedroom = 847, 794 2-bedroom = 715 and 145 3+bedroom = 145 Total Residential Parking Required: 1749

I believe this area would classify as "Avenues with Rapid Transit" (subway) (but I included calculation for the Downtown Core anyways),... thus 1,749 residential parking spaces are required but proposal is only for 648,... that's 1,101 parking spot short!!! (I'm not including the additional 222 required visitor parking spaces)


Note: the 2,200 residential bike parking spaces seems to comply with the City requirement of 1 bike parking space per unit for this area. But also not, this site is about 4km away from Yonge Street,... 4km is the upper end of the 1-4km "sweet-spot" cycling range

 

[innsertnamehere]

Parking rates as regulated in 569-2013 are regularly not met. Especially in the downtown, the rates are very high compared to actual demand for spots. It is far from unusual - though this is an aggressively low amount, I will admit. It may be a blessing in disguise as it will limit traffic impacts for this development on this area.

 

[interchange42]

I believe this area would classify as "Avenues with Rapid Transit" (subway) (but I included calculation for the Downtown Core anyways),... thus 1,749 residential parking spaces are required but proposal is only for 648,... that's 1,101 parking spot short!!! (I'm not including the additional 222 required visitor parking spaces)


Note: the 2,200 residential bike parking spaces seems to comply with the City requirement of 1 bike parking space per unit for this area. But also not, this site is about 4km away from Yonge Street,... 4km is the upper end of the 1-4km "sweet-spot" cycling range

@innsertnamehere is right, no development goes in with all of its required parking in the central area anymore, it's typically just a fraction of what the bylaw requires, one of the amendments regularly granted.

Bike parking requirements, however, are always met these days, and 4 km is nothing when you're biking, nothing, especially on what's essentially a flat plane for kms around.

42

 

[vic]

There will also likely be a new GO/RER/Smarttrack/whatever station 600-1000m away to the west of this site near Bloor and Lansdowne. Quick walk/bike/bikeshare to station, 10 minutes to Union.

 

[sunnyraytoronto]

There will also likely be a new GO/RER/Smarttrack/whatever station 600-1000m away to the west of this site near Bloor and Lansdowne. Quick walk/bike/bikeshare to station, 10 minutes to Union.

There's already is a UP-Express Station 1km away from this site, that provide quick run to Union,.... question is - how many folks will actually pay for such premium service?

http://www.viarail.ca/en/travel-info/transport-services/intermodality/upexpress
https://www.upexpress.com/SchedulesStations/BloorStation

 

[Avenue]

The inclusion of the Weston station in the UPX line is so Toronto.

 

[West End Boy]

There's a reason why they're only predicting 240 cars heading out during AM Peak,.... for 2,219 residential units,....

When I looked through the architectural drawings, I was like,... huh? only P1 & P2 parking level,... where are P3, P4, P5 parking levels????





Ok, let's look at the City's rule then,... this development proposal has only 912 actually 648 residential parking spaces for 2,219 residential units of which 70 Bachelor, 1210 1-bedroom, 794 2-bedroom and 145 3+bedroom

City of Toronto Zoing By-law 569-2013 Residential Parking Requirement
http://www.toronto.ca/zoning/bylaw_amendments/ZBL_NewProvision_Chapter200.htm
But summary here:
http://canadianparking.ca/will-that-be-a-parking-space-for-the-new-condo-or-something-more-useful/
View attachment 123085

Downtown Core: 70 Bachelor = 21, 1210 1-bedroom = 605, 794 2-bedroom = 636 and 145 3+bedroom = 145 Total Residential Parking Required: 1407
Avenues with Rapid Transit (Subway): 70 Bachelor = 42, 1210 1-bedroom = 847, 794 2-bedroom = 715 and 145 3+bedroom = 145 Total Residential Parking Required: 1749

I believe this area would classify as "Avenues with Rapid Transit" (subway) (but I included calculation for the Downtown Core anyways),... thus 1,749 residential parking spaces are required but proposal is only for 648,... that's 1,101 parking spot short!!! (I'm not including the additional 222 required visitor parking spaces)


Note: the 2,200 residential bike parking spaces seems to comply with the City requirement of 1 bike parking space per unit for this area. But also not, this site is about 4km away from Yonge Street,... 4km is the upper end of the 1-4km "sweet-spot" cycling range

I asked the original query because I question the assumptions of the study. I was hardly suggesting they pulled the numbers out of thin air, Interchange 42, and if as you say they are basing it on current conditions, then that would hardly be helpful as the site has no residential units at this point in time. They are therefore making many assumptions.

As someone who, in my former line of work, was involved in numerous urban design and architectural projects, public consultations, technical studies, etc. I know very well the expertise of those involved, but I also know how often the "professionals" can get things wrong.

As Sunnyraytoronto points out, they are providing little parking relative to units. I think this is a great idea. But the remaining spots are more likely to be purchased by die-hard drivers, so I think the projections might be low. I don't know this for a fact, of course, and that's why I asked if anyone else had similar thoughts. I also wonder if they are including parents driving their kids to school or daycare, as the public school just up Pauline Ave has many students being driven a short distance, and this development will no doubt include some families, in spite of the low number of 3BR units.

If anything I guess I might be cynical, but hardly naive.

 

[sunnyraytoronto]

First, this isn't in the downtown core where good employment area are within walking distance,... the only employment area within walking distance of this site is DufferinMall, and not many folks with a minimum wage McJob will be able to afford one of these Hariri Pontarini condo suites.
The City has the by-law for Residential Parking Requirement based on area and proximity to subway & surface transit to help protect surrounding neighbourhoods,... so that the new development won't be taking away existing parking spaces from existing residential neighbourhoods and local businesses.

This development proposal is only providing 37% (648) of their required (1,749) residential parking spaces. This development proposal is missing 1,101 of the required residential parking spaces,... Where are the all the cars from the 1,101 missing residential parking spaces going to park???? In the existing neighbourhoods,... on streets, rented garages, DufferinMall, etc,... HomeOwners will be creating Parking Pads in front of their houses and allowing parking in their back yards,... condo owner will be looking at paying $40K for condo parking spot or $100-150 per month parking spot rental in neighbourhood or just getting a few parking tickets monthly,...

This lack of residential parking space is just giving the local NIMBY-ers ammo to chop this proposal down.

There's an average of 2-2.5 people per condo unit, typically one would drive while another take transit.

 

[Towered]

I'm sorry, but being right on a subway line and also on an extremely frequent bus line with strong connections to other major transit lines negates the need for parking. This city absolutely needs to stop catering to the automobile.

 

[sunnyraytoronto]

Look at North York Centre right on the Yonge subway line and Sheppard STUBway line, huge amount of intensification over the last few decades, with reports after reports,.... all the "experts" thought "oh, bunch of small condo units on 2 subway line so all these single folks will take subway",.... well, beside the southbound Yonge line being jammed as soon as it exit North York Centre, the area has the worst gridlock traffic congestion in the city, sewer backup and basement flooding,.... and school kids are bused out of the area (single folks don't remain single).

With intensification, there needs to be the proper infrastructure to support the intensification,.... both on-site and in the local area.

For this development proposal with 2,219 units,.... that's about 4,400-5,500 new residents. How are they supposed to get around? Who thinks they can get by with just 648 cars??? The Sufferin 29 Bus route can't even handle today's TTC passengers,....

 

[interchange42]

First, this isn't in the downtown core where good employment area are within walking distance,... the only employment area within walking distance of this site is DufferinMall, and not many folks with a minimum wage McJob will be able to afford one of these Hariri Pontarini condo suites.
The City has the by-law for Residential Parking Requirement based on area and proximity to subway & surface transit to help protect surrounding neighbourhoods,... so that the new development won't be taking away existing parking spaces from existing residential neighbourhoods and local businesses.

This development proposal is only providing 37% (648) of their required (1,749) residential parking spaces. This development proposal is missing 1,101 of the required residential parking spaces,... Where are the all the cars from the 1,101 missing residential parking spaces going to park???? In the existing neighbourhoods,... on streets, rented garages, DufferinMall, etc,... HomeOwners will be creating Parking Pads in front of their houses and allowing parking in their back yards,... condo owner will be looking at paying $40K for condo parking spot or $100-150 per month parking spot rental in neighbourhood or just getting a few parking tickets monthly,...

This lack of residential parking space is just giving the local NIMBY-ers ammo to chop this proposal down.

There's an average of 2-2.5 people per condo unit, typically one would drive while another take transit.

People are not buying parking spots for their condos at anywhere near the rate that they used to because fewer and fewer of them own cars. The spots required by the bylaw are still calculated on out-of-date projections. This has been shown in condo after condo after condo where sales of parking spaces have not reached the expected demand. Now, developers don't want to build what they know they cannot sell, so they ask to build fewer than what's required by the bylaw. The City gets it and regularly allows fewer spaces to be built. Whether the particular number that the developers are proposing now is where they settle, who knows? There's a chance that the City will want more parking spaces, and they might want fewer units in the buildings.

Don't get too hung up on the numbers yet.

42

 

[West End Boy]

People are not buying parking spots for their condos at anywhere near the rate that they used to because fewer and fewer of them own cars. The spots required by the bylaw are still calculated on out-of-date projections. This has been shown in condo after condo after condo where sales of parking spaces have not reached the expected demand. Now, developers don't want to build what they know they cannot sell, so they ask to build fewer than what's required by the bylaw. The City gets it and regularly allows fewer spaces to be built. Whether the particular number that the developers are proposing now is where they settle, who knows? There's a chance that the City will want more parking spaces, and they might want fewer units in the buildings.

Don't get too hung up on the numbers yet.

42

It's definitely very likely the number of units will be cut down significantly before approval, so the number of parking spots would end up being a higher percentage if they leave the spots generally as is.

I agree with others that the subway and buses are already packed at rush hour, and the bike lanes don't quite reach here yet, so there's some work to do yet if we want a majority to take non-vehicular modes of transportation.

 

[WislaHD]

Look at North York Centre right on the Yonge subway line and Sheppard STUBway line, huge amount of intensification over the last few decades, with reports after reports,.... all the "experts" thought "oh, bunch of small condo units on 2 subway line so all these single folks will take subway",.... well, beside the southbound Yonge line being jammed as soon as it exit North York Centre, the area has the worst gridlock traffic congestion in the city, sewer backup and basement flooding,.... and school kids are bused out of the area (single folks don't remain single).

With intensification, there needs to be the proper infrastructure to support the intensification,.... both on-site and in the local area.

For this development proposal with 2,219 units,.... that's about 4,400-5,500 new residents. How are they supposed to get around? Who thinks they can get by with just 648 cars??? The Sufferin 29 Bus route can't even handle today's TTC passengers,....

You can't honestly be comparing Sheppard to Bloor?

Sheppard is next to a major major highways. People buying condos along Sheppard typically intend to have driving as part of their commuting mix. Which is perfectly understandable for many couples with divergent commuting patterns. Further, the entire community surrounding Sheppard is auto-oriented, aside from the tiny strip along Sheppard.

Meanwhile, if you intend to be buying at Bloor and Dufferin, chances are you do not intend to be commuting to Markham - because at that price range you can find something more suitable for your commuting needs. Additionally, Bloor&Dufferin is incredibly walkable community, you can live without a car.

Your comparison works for somewhere like Humber Bay Shores (where the lack of alternatives means people resort to driving) but not here in this location.

Now whether Bloor-Yonge station or Dufferin bus can hold more people, is another, unrelated question. The answer to which however, is most definitely not increased car parking.