Toronto 777 Victoria Park Avenue | 114.2m | 35s | CreateTO | Sweeny &Co

AlbertC said:
Article from the Beach Metro

beachmetro.com

Toronto city council approves new affordable housing project at 777 Victoria Park Ave. – Beach Metro Community News

By AMARACHI AMADIKE During its last regular session until October, Toronto city council greenlit a new affordable housing project at 777 Victoria Park Ave
beachmetro.com beachmetro.com
Click to expand...
So given what’s said below we can expect another 2 or 3 years till shovels actually hit the ground??? All these HousingNow sites seem to just be a constant meeting after meeting after meeting…..


“There has not yet been a date set for public consultation, but Kandavel says that his office is in communication with city staff as they plan for a community meeting this fall.”
 
JBR said:
So given what’s said below we can expect another 2 or 3 years till shovels actually hit the ground??? All these HousingNow sites seem to just be a constant meeting after meeting after meeting…..


“There has not yet been a date set for public consultation, but Kandavel says that his office is in communication with city staff as they plan for a community meeting this fall.”
Click to expand...
There is no provincial requirement for another public meeting -- the new Councillor may pressure the staff into doing one anyway...
 
Paclo said:
Mostly unchanged except for the following:
  • Total vehicular parking increased from 111 to 153 (+42 vehicle parking spaces)
  • Total bicycle parking decreased from 720 to 542 (- 178 bicycle parking spaces)
  • Minor GFA increase
Click to expand...
The Local Councillor got his wish... :rolleyes:

Scarborough gonna Scarborough.
 
christiesplits said:
Quite disappointing to see the increase of parking spaces. I recognize car ownership is quite high in nearby communities like The Beaches and Birch Cliff, but an expanded commuter lot this deep into the city seems like a poor allocation of space.
Click to expand...
To be 100% clear, this appears to be a "reallocation" of pre-planned underground space from Bicycle Parking to Vehicle Parking, so it doesn't appear that the underground space became any bigger in this iteration.

City just traded Bicycle Parking for Vehicle Parking on a 4.25-to-1 ratio.

Each new individual Vehicle Parking space allocation in their underground area consumed the space for approx. ~4.25 former Bicycle Parking spaces. 🧮
 
I don't own a car & firmly believe we need to decrease their use, but some comments from friends & the anti bike lane crowd recently have given me pause. Many in Scarborough work downtown, but don't live anywhere near decent public transit. So their choice is either to drive all the way downtown, or to drive to a closer TTC or GO station to take public transit the rest of the way. Several mentioned that taking public transit right from their front door doubled their commute time or more. If the parking at 777 Victoria includes a Green P element, that might not be a terrible thing if it means most of the spots are being taken up by cars that came from deeper into Scarborough and would otherwise be clogging up downtown. Perhaps at least in the interim until we have better public transit across Scarborough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PL1
Natika33 said:
I don't own a car & firmly believe we need to decrease their use, but some comments from friends & the anti bike lane crowd recently have given me pause. Many in Scarborough work downtown, but don't live anywhere near decent public transit. So their choice is either to drive all the way downtown, or to drive to a closer TTC or GO station to take public transit the rest of the way. Several mentioned that taking public transit right from their front door doubled their commute time or more. If the parking at 777 Victoria includes a Green P element, that might not be a terrible thing if it means most of the spots are being taken up by cars that came from deeper into Scarborough and would otherwise be clogging up downtown. Perhaps at least in the interim until we have better public transit across Scarborough.
Click to expand...
The "value" of these deeply-discounted parking spaces at TTC lots that would be LOST - is greatly outweighed by the generation of the new affordable and rental apartments that will be directly adjacent to the subway.

We are literally spending BILLIONS to create better public transit across Scarborough - https://www.metrolinx.com/en/discover/tunnelling-begins-on-scarborough-subway-extension-

The trade-off for "Subways, Subways, Subways..!" in Scarborough is that it will be more expensive and harder to find "Parking, Parking, Parking" there as we transition away from low-occupancy vehicle uses.
 
HousingNowTO said:
The "value" of these deeply-discounted parking spaces at TTC lots that would be LOST - is greatly outweighed by the generation of the new affordable and rental apartments that will be directly adjacent to the subway.

We are literally spending BILLIONS to create better public transit across Scarborough - https://www.metrolinx.com/en/discover/tunnelling-begins-on-scarborough-subway-extension-

The trade-off for "Subways, Subways, Subways..!" in Scarborough is that it will be more expensive and harder to find "Parking, Parking, Parking" there as we transition away from low-occupancy vehicle uses.
Click to expand...

To be clear, @Natika33 did not argue against the housing here. She wasn't arguing for the preservation of the existing parking; just considering the inclusion of paid parking within the new complex.

I don't think there's anything wrong w/that so long as the demand for the spaces is sufficient when those spaces are priced at the greater of fair market value or cost.
 
Northern Light said:
To be clear, @Natika33 did not argue against the housing here. She wasn't arguing for the preservation of the existing parking; just considering the inclusion of paid parking within the new complex.

I don't think there's anything wrong w/that so long as the demand for the spaces is sufficient when those spaces are priced at the greater of fair market value or cost.
Click to expand...
^^This ☝. Perhaps some parking would also be useful for the retail planned. Just trying to keep an open mind as some of the people I've chatted with are generally also pro public transit/bike lanes and are not generally pro cars/raving lunatics.
 
Agreed. Our concerns are with the DEFAULT “below-market” Green-P pricing-models that the local Councillor was trying to bake into the requirements earlier this year….

www.thestar.com

Should Toronto finally do away with cheap parking rates?: Keenan

Transit, social housing are city hall’s proclaimed priorities. Yet cheap and plentiful parking is the practice.
www.thestar.com www.thestar.com
 
HousingNowTO said:
Agreed. Our concerns are with the DEFAULT “below-market” Green-P pricing-models that the local Councillor was trying to bake into the requirements earlier this year….

www.thestar.com

Should Toronto finally do away with cheap parking rates?: Keenan

Transit, social housing are city hall’s proclaimed priorities. Yet cheap and plentiful parking is the practice.
www.thestar.com www.thestar.com
Click to expand...

I agree completely on getting rid of that...........I always had that won a couple of years ago..........sigh..........

Of course there's still the ongoing matter of permit parking pricing that makes Green P look like a market-adhering organization.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top