Why is the area around the CP Agincourt rail yards not entirely industrial/commercial?

[rbt]

It would be within walking distance of the new Sheppard & Mccowan subway station, though would the city approve upzoning that much? Even if only 100 acres out of 148 is converted, that’s still 300 acres of residential floorspace…

The upzoned land around the Richmond Hill subway extension is closer to an FSI of 8 and has a provincial stamp of approval on it. Golden Mile, a Toronto driven proposal, is 3.

3 seems like a very easy win at a Land Tribunal trial if the city did somehow reject it as too dense.

Edit: All this shows is the land must have a very high value to CP as a railway yard, otherwise it probably wouldn't still be a railway yard.

 

[KevinT]

Rezoning is easy, remediation is hard. I'm pretty sure that former railyard lands would need a lot of remediation... what does that cost and would anyone be willing to pay?

 

[Bordercollie]

Rezoning is easy, remediation is hard. I'm pretty sure that former railyard lands would need a lot of remediation... what does that cost and would anyone be willing to pay?

It would be more likely to use it for a GO transit yard or they will need two main line tracks to bypass the yard if HFR is going to be built. Unlikely that there wood be more development allowed. Railway lands are very valuable for transit corridors.

 

[Woodbridge_Heights]

While not necessarily a freight yard the VIA Maintenance yards are practically surrounded by residential development. Similarly the former West Toronto Yard (now closed) is VERY close to residential development.

I think each situation is slightly different in how/why they end up the way they do.

 

[crs1026]

While not necessarily a freight yard the VIA Maintenance yards are practically surrounded by residential development. Similarly the former West Toronto Yard (now closed) is VERY close to residential development.

I think each situation is slightly different in how/why they end up the way they do.

The Agincourt situation was particularly painful because the hump yard (now demolished) was extremely noisy. Less obvious, but just as compelling, is the potential for other environmental contaminants. Standards and mitigating measures have increased somewhat over the years, but the potential for mishaps leading to releases or evacuations remain. And railway trains inherently release contaminants, perhaps in miniscule quantity per car - but when cars accumulate and stand in yards the impact aggregates.

The RAC (which presents an industry viewpoint) has issued guidelines for the proper separation of residential development from railway lines. The industry has actually been pretty vocal about the need for separation. Local planning decisions tend to be much more lenient or look for other fixes, such as reinforced barriers instead of just leaving space.

While situations like West Toronto are clearly historical, there has been a lot of concern about housing encroaching the Mimico rail yards. I haven't followed that one closely. But I wouldn't use Mimico as a precedent showing that the two can coexist in close proximity. Common sense says, keep them well apart.

- Paul

 

[NW87]

Not sure if it was anyone here but someone was flying a drone over the yard last week or the week before. I would strongly advise against that as they're pretty quick to respond to such things over critical infrastructure.

 

[lenaitch]

Not sure if it was anyone here but someone was flying a drone over the yard last week or the week before. I would strongly advise against that as they're pretty quick to respond to such things over critical infrastructure.

Actually, according to the Transport Canada 'Drone Site Selection Tool' map, the yard is just outside of restricted airspace for RPAS. The line runs sw/ne just off the yard. This is in addition to other TC rules for drone operation.

 

[Transportfan]

If you are referring to the residential area east of Keele and south of Highway 7, it was indeed developed before the CN rail yards. This photo from the City Archives, circa 1962, while the yard was being built.

- Paul

View attachment 423917

I find it funny that Concord is still shown on the official Ontario map even though it was never really anything to begin with.

 

[dowlingm]

Given the erosion of industrial land in other parts of the city like the Celestica lands, the Portlands, Golden Mile, one would think any reduction of the CP site should remain principally industrial/utility (subway yard, hydro facilities etc). To rezone as residential would be just one more kick of the can down the road of addressing yellowbelt, and create further pressure to downsize industrial activity further. Look at how intrusions into such lands resulted in protests against the new bus garage at McNicoll.

 

[NW87]

Actually, according to the Transport Canada 'Drone Site Selection Tool' map, the yard is just outside of restricted airspace for RPAS. The line runs sw/ne just off the yard. This is in addition to other TC rules for drone operation.

It's not the airspace concern, like you said it's outside the buttonville airspace and if it were a micro drone it wouldn't even be a concern. It was below the tops of rail cars whizzing past us. At least keep it high as to not cause a distraction.

 

[lenaitch]

It's not the airspace concern, like you said it's outside the buttonville airspace and if it were a micro drone it wouldn't even be a concern. It was below the tops of rail cars whizzing past us. At least keep it high as to not cause a distraction.

Ah, that makes a difference and changes my concept of "over". Clearly, the drone would not be operated in line-of-sight (unless it was one or your mates!) and I think there is a general rule about operating too close to people or infrastructure but most operators are not registered anyway and few know the rules.