Toronto Islington Station Redevelopment | 7.85m | 1s | TTC | AECOM

AlbertC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
21,765
Reaction score
58,341
Location
Davenport



20200827_104945.png
20200827_104948.jpg
20200827_104950.png
 
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 :(

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 by a moderator:
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...
 
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:
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
 
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 it's done, build the institutional knowledge.
 
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.
 
LOHAS Park this sucker!

You made me look it up.

From Wikipedia:

LOHAS Park will be the largest MTR property development, a 32.08 ha (79.3 acres) site with 50 towers containing 21,500 apartments and approximately 45,000 m2 (480,000 sq ft) of retail.[3]

***

This is a picture of the LOHAS Park site from the China Morning Post: (March 2019)

This is phase 7 of construction, all the towers visible are part of said site to my understanding.

1598640417862.png
 
Comparing LOHAS Park to the Islington lands; the primary site is only 2ha/5 acres
If you looked at the secondary parking (portion not under hydro wires) you get another 0.4 ha/ 1 acre

Bit less room to work with........but still room to do lots, and do it well.
 
The biggest issue on this site is the ridiculous 'pavilion' bus terminal. Why is that not within the podium of another two-tower structure? There's also *so much* wasted space around the proposed four towers.
 
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.
For me, like @ProjectEnd, the issue is with the pavilion bus terminal sitting by itself. That should be on the interior of a commercial building, and that's what CreateTO should be working on arranging on the site with the TTC, who again, should have a separate office dedicated to managing partnerships with developers for their station sites.

42
 

Back
Top