Toronto Ontario Line 3 | ?m | ?s

I think Ford's announcement is targeted just as much at GO stations as it is TTC stations. The GO stations are the ones surrounded by oceans of parking that are ripe for redevelopment.

But the posters saying that integration needs to happen at the outset are exactly right. It's much harder to add a building overtop of an existing underground structure than it is to design them both concurrently.
 
I think Ford's announcement is targeted just as much at GO stations as it is TTC stations. The GO stations are the ones surrounded by oceans of parking that are ripe for redevelopment.

But the posters saying that integration needs to happen at the outset are exactly right. It's much harder to add a building overtop of an existing underground structure than it is to design them both concurrently.

Also, people who salivate at the possibility of private developments atop stations providing large amounts of funding to support subway projects along East Asian models need to get a wakeup call - the big money doesn't come from little icky sites above exits where you could build one small tower or two; the big money comes from large parcels where you can have entire housing estates at densities that would make St. Jamestown blush OR massive office towers along on scale of CIBC Square in the CBD. These opportunities by and large doesn't exist in Toronto.

AoD
 
Also, people who salivate at the possibility of private developments atop stations providing large amounts of funding to support subway projects along East Asian models need to get a wakeup call - the big money doesn't come from little icky sites above exits where you could build one small tower or two; the big money comes from large parcels where you can have entire housing estates at densities that would make St. Jamestown blush OR massive office towers along on scale of CIBC Square in the CBD. These opportunities by and large doesn't exist in Toronto.

AoD

Thought: Before beginning a 1B overhaul of Y-B station; buy/expropriate Hudson's Bay Centre, demolish it; and rebuild it as a revenue-generator for TTC.

Increase 'Class A' office space by 600,000sq ft+; replace the condo/hotel with market + affordable rental, increase unit total by at least 600; and build top-tier Bloor-worth retail.

Note the acquisition cost is partially offset by lower construction costs for Y+B station resulting from having the over-the-top building removed.
 
Thought: Before beginning a 1B overhaul of Y-B station; buy/expropriate Hudson's Bay Centre, demolish it; and rebuild it as a revenue-generator for TTC.

Increase 'Class A' office space by 600,000sq ft+; replace the condo/hotel with market + affordable rental, increase unit total by at least 600; and build top-tier Bloor-worth retail.

Note the acquisition cost is partially offset by lower construction costs for Y+B station resulting from having the over-the-top building removed.

I don't think the Hudson Bay site is that popular as an office location - or could command such prices that would make the exercise worth it. Also the East Asian model is mostly predicated upon greenfield development, not from redeveloping existing high density uses.

AoD
 
Bill 171 passed the final reading yesterday; it's give Metrolinx power to accelerate city approval processes for subway extensions (and Ontario Line) within the GTA.


Bill Content:

I had believed this included GO Expansion and future BRT/LRT projects; it does not.
 
Last edited:
From Bill 197 released today:

Schedule 20:

Expropriations, no hearings of necessity 3. (1) Subsections 6 (2) to (5), section 7 and subsections 8 (1) and (2) of the Expropriations Act do not apply to an expropriation of land, within the meaning of that Act, if, (a) at least some part of the land is designated under subsection 2 (1) as transit-oriented community land; and (b) the expropriation is for a transit-oriented community project.

“transit-oriented community project” means a development project of any nature or kind and for any usage in connection with the construction or operation of a station that is part of a priority transit project, and includes a development project located on transit corridor land within the meaning of Bill 171 (Building Transit Faster Act, 2020), introduced on February 18, 2020. (“projet communautaire axé sur le transport en commun”)
 
In Japan, the transit agencies OWN high-rise offices, residential, hotels, and other multi-use buildings. They are a source of revenue for the transit agencies. The TTC and GO is forbidden to do so, hence the "private" sector agreements to do it, and who will be getting the lease revenue instead of the TTC or GO.
 
In Japan, the transit agencies OWN high-rise offices, residential, hotels, and other multi-use buildings. They are a source of revenue for the transit agencies. The TTC and GO is forbidden to do so, hence the "private" sector agreements to do it, and who will be getting the lease revenue instead of the TTC or GO.
Are they really? I heard the province will do real estate for subway projects (ie. Ontario Line).
 
In Japan, the transit agencies OWN high-rise offices, residential, hotels, and other multi-use buildings. They are a source of revenue for the transit agencies. The TTC and GO is forbidden to do so, hence the "private" sector agreements to do it, and who will be getting the lease revenue instead of the TTC or GO.
The private operators (all the JRs for example) do, as far I came to understand, the municipal owned agencies do not.
 
Are they really? I heard the province will do real estate for subway projects (ie. Ontario Line).

Government using expropriation to compete with private entities would result in a lawsuit based on the Charter violations. There are no issues with selling excess land after the fact; though even then care is taken to ensure they don't expropriate much more than necessary.

If they negotiate purchases without using expropriation then they might get away with it (though even that is touch and go); but station placement becomes sub-optimal as it's now based on where you can assemble land rather than optimal locations.
 
Last edited:
In Japan, the transit agencies OWN high-rise offices, residential, hotels, and other multi-use buildings. They are a source of revenue for the transit agencies. The TTC and GO is forbidden to do so, hence the "private" sector agreements to do it, and who will be getting the lease revenue instead of the TTC or GO.

I've been of the mind that Metrolinx should have a dedicated property management subsidiary. That rather than looking to private developers for everything, that that sub-agency would be responsible for planning, construction, and management of real estate surrounding GO (and potentially TTC) station sites. That way the profits can be directly invested back into transit. Farming out to the private sector bleeds away too much money to corporate bottom lines.

It would also give Metrolinx greater control over the types of residential units being offered. Ideally, they would be targeting markets that would be more likely to maximize transit ridership. Build a bunch of 1 and 2 bedroom apartments with reasonable rents next to GO stations, specifically targeting the 20s to early 30s demo who are working downtown, don't want to pay the astronomical rents to live downtown, but still want easy access to transit.
 
You probably don't want building construction going on directly above an active TTC station.

No, the design would need to be integrated from the outset. Residential properties need things like loading bays, elevators, bike parking on the main or B1 levels.

Now I say all this, but how many OL stations would it need to apply to? Probably just Cosburn and Gerrard Square, right? Maybe Moss Park? East Harbour is a special case due to GO integration.... Osgoode, Queen/Yonge, Pape, Science Centre are going under existing stations. There's no space at Exhibition. King/Bathurst is fully built up already and there are protected heritage properties to consider. Queen/Spadina is probably going 100% under the street to accommodate transfers. Corktown is getting pretty full, too.

I know, right, it's super weird to think that we are contemplating building subway stations where there's already.... you know.... people!

Haven't TTC stations previously had construction above after being completed (Canada Square above Eglinton, HBC above Bloor-Yonge)?
 
I've been of the mind that Metrolinx should have a dedicated property management subsidiary. That rather than looking to private developers for everything, that that sub-agency would be responsible for planning, construction, and management of real estate surrounding GO (and potentially TTC) station sites. That way the profits can be directly invested back into transit. Farming out to the private sector bleeds away too much money to corporate bottom lines.

It would also give Metrolinx greater control over the types of residential units being offered. Ideally, they would be targeting markets that would be more likely to maximize transit ridership. Build a bunch of 1 and 2 bedroom apartments with reasonable rents next to GO stations, specifically targeting the 20s to early 30s demo who are working downtown, don't want to pay the astronomical rents to live downtown, but still want easy access to transit.

I would include 3-bedroom apartments as well. As well as a home office, instead of an alcove (needs to be separate office for income tax purposes to claim home office expenses).
 

Back
Top