News   Mar 27, 2024
 1.2K     1 
News   Mar 27, 2024
 1.1K     2 
News   Mar 27, 2024
 638     0 

King Street (Streetcar Transit Priority)

Let's not continue validating the war on car victimizers. Buildings already have minimum parking requirements which should be removed in areas with access to transit.
The City has already allowed several developments to proceed with less parking than 'normal'. Because they are well served by transit. A recent application (33 Sherbourne) actually wants only 65 parking spaces for 439 units
 
The City has already allowed several developments to proceed with less parking than 'normal'. Because they are well served by transit. A recent application (33 Sherbourne) actually wants only 65 parking spaces for 439 units

But do they allow for the general public to use them as an off-street parking facility, for the retail along the street? Or are they for visitors to the building?
 
But do they allow for the general public to use them as an off-street parking facility, for the retail along the street? Or are they for visitors to the building?
These would be reserved for residents and MAYBE their visitors. Creating a public garage within a condo or other residential building is going to be difficult. Who will run the parking? will it open 24/7? Who will repair it? Can it be large enough to be economic?
 
These would be reserved for residents and MAYBE their visitors. Creating a public garage within a condo or other residential building is going to be difficult. Who will run the parking? will it open 24/7? Who will repair it? Can it be large enough to be economic?

With the revenue going toward the condo to help reduce the maintenance fees?

If none of the parking spaces would be used for the residents, the spaces could be used for additional locker storage spaces, if not used as a revenue source for outside parking users.
 
These would be reserved for residents and MAYBE their visitors. Creating a public garage within a condo or other residential building is going to be difficult. Who will run the parking? will it open 24/7? Who will repair it? Can it be large enough to be economic?

I think that this is a job that should be delegated to the Toronto Parking Authority.

Every new condo should be built with equivalent number of parking spots on the the closest main street for a block up to 10% of all spaces, and then street parking eliminated.

The TPA would then take over running the garage as a Green P. This could be as simple as installing ticket metres that are checked by parking enforcement who already check street parking or something more involved like assembling an enclosed area with an automated gate and a payment kiosk. The condo board would get a nice cut after maintenance expenses, the city would still get some parking revenue and Toronto streets would cease being used to store cars and instead used to move people.
 
The City (or Astral) have FINALLY started to remove the old transit shelters from the non-stops. The one @ Jarvis went today and I think they are doing Church too - they were looking at it. As shelters have ads I suspect it may not be too long before Astral erect replacements in the correct (new) locations.

Finally, indeed. I walk by every day and routinely have to inform people waiting at the non stops that they're going to miss the streetcar.

The issue was that Astral had ad deals so they couldn't remove or even move the ads until the deals expired. They'll not want to lose that revenue opportunity so I'm very sure that each shelter will be moved across the street to the new spots. I can't wait. The one at King and John is in a particularly bad spot. Moving it to in front of Metro Hall where there is far more space will be welcome.
 
The City (or Astral) have FINALLY started to remove the old transit shelters from the non-stops. The one @ Jarvis went today and I think they are doing Church too - they were looking at it. As shelters have ads I suspect it may not be too long before Astral erect replacements in the correct (new) locations.
UPDATE from the KSP guys:

Astral will remove all the old shelters on or before October 20.
 
These would be reserved for residents and MAYBE their visitors. Creating a public garage within a condo or other residential building is going to be difficult. Who will run the parking? will it open 24/7? Who will repair it? Can it be large enough to be economic?

Actually this can be quite straight-forward. If you've ever been to Whole Foods Yorkville location (Yorkville Village, nee Hazelton Lanes); it has operated with retail and condo parking with a common street entrance, but 2 distinct entrances within the building since its inception.

The first level underground serves residents and is a turn-off on the ramp down, it has its own door and secure access for residents. While the P2/P3 levels are for customers/guests and is paid parking, secured only by a swing arm which rises when you obtain your ticket.

They share both a common entrance and a common exit to Avenue Rd.

****

An alternative way to handle this is that entire parking lot becomes Green P, who obtains either strata ownership or a 99-year lease.

The requirement is for Green P to provide prospective purchasers first-right of refusal to spots; at a set monthly rate; which is indexed to inflation; price is revisable to market after 10 years.

That allows prospective condo owners (or rental tenants) access to the spaces they need, without having to purchase them upfront; shifts the maintenance cost to Green P; and allows public access to spots as well.

These spaces could be separated or on shared levels with appropriate access controls and security measures.
 
These would be reserved for residents and MAYBE their visitors. Creating a public garage within a condo or other residential building is going to be difficult. Who will run the parking? will it open 24/7? Who will repair it? Can it be large enough to be economic?
There is already precedent in Toronto for this. It's not a new concept
 
There is already precedent in Toronto for this. It's not a new concept

Most drivers will look for the Green P garage first before giving up and turning to a private company's parking garage. That's because Green P was originally subsidized by the city. These days, it is slowly becoming a revenue source.
 
There is already precedent in Toronto for this. It's not a new concept
Of course it's not impossible and there are many examples in Toronto and elsewhere and all that I know of were initially designed that way and have separate sections for residents and 'others'. Though I am sure it would be possible, it would normally be very hard to retrofit a condo garage to have two 'sections" and I doubt running a car park with less than ca 50 spaces would be worth the effort.
 
Most drivers will look for the Green P garage first before giving up and turning to a private company's parking garage. That's because Green P was originally subsidized by the city. These days, it is slowly becoming a revenue source.
The TPA returns LOTS of $$ to the City each year but I have never seen a breakdown between street parking, outdoor lots and garages. I bet some of the latter do not fully cover their costs but the TPA (or the City) often sell their surface parking lots and garages for redevelopment so they make $$ that way too - or use the land to serve some 'higher civic purpose'. (e,g. the large Green P garage on Queen @ Victoria is currently in the planning stage for new housing.)
 
The TPA returns LOTS of $$ to the City each year but I have never seen a breakdown between street parking, outdoor lots and garages. I bet some of the latter do not fully cover their costs but the TPA (or the City) often sell their surface parking lots and garages for redevelopment so they make $$ that way too - or use the land to serve some 'higher civic purpose'. (e,g. the large Green P garage on Queen @ Victoria is currently in the planning stage for new housing.)

Wonder if property taxes are included in the Green P revenue? Or do they include property taxes as an excuse to sell some Green P property?
 
Wonder if property taxes are included in the Green P revenue? Or do they include property taxes as an excuse to sell some Green P property?

The audited financials treat PILTs (15% of revenue) separately from dividends to the city (41% of revenue).

Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILTs) are voluntary payments made by government agencies (all levels) as they're not actually obligated to pay property taxes.
 
The issue was that Astral had ad deals so they couldn't remove or even move the ads until the deals expired. They'll not want to lose that revenue opportunity so I'm very sure that each shelter will be moved across the street to the new spots. I can't wait. The one at King and John is in a particularly bad spot. Moving it to in front of Metro Hall where there is far more space will be welcome.

I can't believe that is the cause for the delay. Those contracts all have break fees or make good fees, and bus shelter ads aren't exactly high dollar contracts. If Astral can't swing activating a make good to put the ads from a handful of bus shelters at some of their hundreds of other locations, or use a contract clause to terminate the deal early and pay it out, they are either a really rinky dink organisation, or they are seriously financially strapped where a few hundred dollars of lost revenue is make or break from bankruptcy.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top