News   Apr 15, 2021
 168     0 
News   Apr 14, 2021
 361     0 
News   Apr 14, 2021
 776     1 

Islington Station Redevelopment (Housing Now, 4 towers, ?)

AlbertC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
13,732
Reaction score
26,602
Location
Davenport



20200827_104945.png
20200827_104948.jpg
20200827_104950.png
 

innsertnamehere

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
15,141
Reaction score
10,579
Now that density actually looks sort of reasonable. Probably the first Housing Now site to get it right from the get-go. I would say there is still a bit of room for extra density, but this is generally fine. Towers should be a bit taller but they aren't orders of magnitude off.
 

turini2

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 20, 2020
Messages
131
Reaction score
427
Location
London, UK
I know it's required, but a single storey TTC bus terminal does seem to be a waste of space on this site. I guess integrating it into a building would cost too much :(

Agreed with above, the density looks good for what is basically a subway station site!
 

AlbertC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
13,732
Reaction score
26,602
Location
Davenport
I know it's required, but a single storey TTC bus terminal does seem to be a waste of space on this site. I guess integrating it into a building would cost too much :(

Agreed with above, the density looks good for what is basically a subway station site!

This is a common criticism on how the TTC often has these standalone, single function transit structures. In highly urbanized cities around the world like Hong Kong, it's almost certain that bus terminals are located within a building complex.

HousingNow called this out for a lot of the new Eglinton Crosstown stations currently under construction.


 
Last edited:

slickpete83

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 30, 2007
Messages
273
Reaction score
94
sucks , this would mean no more free parking on the weekend at Islington station with this development for anyone who wants to go downtown
 

turini2

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 20, 2020
Messages
131
Reaction score
427
Location
London, UK
HousingNow called this out for a lot of the new Eglinton Crosstown stations currently under construction.
Great to see some activism on this front - as an example, the under construction Tube station pictured, Transport for London are retaining ownership of the rental building so they'll get the sustained income from rents...
 

WislaHD

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 21, 2013
Messages
9,314
Reaction score
7,642
Location
Midtown Toronto
I know it's required, but a single storey TTC bus terminal does seem to be a waste of space on this site. I guess integrating it into a building would cost too much :(

Agreed with above, the density looks good for what is basically a subway station site!
Yeah, even if it is a simple 5 storey office building on top, it at least would have been more useful/productive.

It is annoying that Metrolinx has repeated the same errors as TTC along the Eglinton Crosstown LRT.
 
Last edited:

interchange42

Administrator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
24,230
Reaction score
22,664
Location
by the Humber
sucks , this would mean no more free parking on the weekend at Islington station with this development for anyone who wants to go downtown
There will still be one lot under the power lines to the northeast of the station. Otherwise, go to a parking lot at Kipling, or get to the station by bus or some other method. There's no reason why we should be holding developable land as surface parking at a subway station.

42
 

interchange42

Administrator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
24,230
Reaction score
22,664
Location
by the Humber
I know it's required, but a single storey TTC bus terminal does seem to be a waste of space on this site. I guess integrating it into a building would cost too much :(

Agreed with above, the density looks good for what is basically a subway station site!
The TTC should be compelled by the City to start a development arm and that they be required to go mutli-use in new builds (like this one) and be encouraged to explore multi-use redevelopments of their existing station sites. Partnering with more experienced private developers on the multi-use buildings should be required as well, as they are slow as molasses on their own work. They'd still have to be involved with standards compliance, but I'd like to see them be compelled to move more quickly when dealing with the private developers who have to deal with their bureaucratic sluggishness.

42
 

Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
11,222
Reaction score
17,358
Location
Toronto/EY
The TTC should be compelled by the City to start a development arm and that they be required to go mutli-use in new builds (like this one) and be encouraged to explore multi-use redevelopments of their existing station sites. Partnering with more experienced private developers on the multi-use buildings should be required as well, as they are slow as molasses on their own work. They'd still have to be involved with standards compliance, but I'd like to see them be compelled to move more quickly when dealing with the private developers who have to deal with their bureaucratic sluggishness.

42

I don't think we need to reinvent the wheel.

Why don't we hire MTR (Hong Kong's Transit Group) who are experts in developing over their stations.

Let them show us how its done, build the institutional knowledge.
 

WislaHD

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 21, 2013
Messages
9,314
Reaction score
7,642
Location
Midtown Toronto
The TTC should be compelled by the City to start a development arm and that they be required to go mutli-use in new builds (like this one) and be encouraged to explore multi-use redevelopments of their existing station sites. Partnering with more experienced private developers on the multi-use buildings should be required as well, as they are slow as molasses on their own work. They'd still have to be involved with standards compliance, but I'd like to see them be compelled to move more quickly when dealing with the private developers who have to deal with their bureaucratic sluggishness.

42
It's not as if CreateTO isn't staffed by talent from the private sector - it is.

CreateTO simply has to deal with the same bureaucratic hurdles (perhaps much more since they are a municipal agency and are expected to) as private sector. I agree that partnership with private developers could be a valuable thing as the provincial experience in the West Don Lands has shown. I would still levy the issue is with City Planning and other municipal departments. If City Planning tells CreateTO to do lower density, it would be awkward for CreateTO to take the city to LPAT. (Though maybe CreateTO ought to? but then there is the issue of optics at community meetings where local NIMBYs see a municipal agency rezoning for 30 storeys and tell their councillor that they don't like it...)

Ultimately, it comes down to a lack of municipal leadership and a lack of desire to address Toronto's housing challenges with actions as opposed to words.
 

Towered

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
6,021
Reaction score
4,500
Thrilled to finally see some movement on this, as the current state of the site has been an eyesore for decades. I agree with the other comments however that the density is a bit on the light side considering the location. All the proposed tower heights are less than the towers right across the tracks - how is that justified? If anything, 60 floors or more would be appropriate here. Why does the city always lowball this kind of stuff?
 

Top