http://www.dailycommercialnews.com/cgi-bin/top10.pl?rm=show_top10_project&id=356c931b12d77451dcbd4235bcc9cbca4385242e&projectid=9055519&region=ontario


Note: Project is very preliminary. Owner has completed conceptual plans, policy statements and urban design guidelines for this project in-house. A Public Information Centre (PIC) is expected November 27, 2008. Pending completion of the PIC, Owner expects the concept design and urban design guidelines will be forwarded to City Council for approval of rezoning and development approvals Summer, 2009. This project will not proceed until the Owner receives a draft zoning bylaw from City Council which will outline planning guidelines for the project. Plans and land use are subject to change depending on the land requirements for the Transit City LRT expansion followed under report number 9072987. Owner will seek interest from Development partners when approvals are in place. Further update Fall, 2009.
Project: proposed const of a 35-storey office tower with a podium to house retail components. This project will be built above Eglington Subway station.

http://www.toronto.ca/planning/yonge_eglin.htm

http://www.toronto.ca/planning/images/yonge_eg_rendering_lg.jpg

Renderings provided by Solaris on UrbanToronto:

http://i350.photobucket.com/albums/q438/Solaris_Metrogate/YE_ne.jpg

http://i350.photobucket.com/albums/q438/Solaris_Metrogate/YE_se.jpg

O_o

Interesting...

I love that old fashioned style of watercolour rendering... there aren't that many people around today who know how to do renderings without a computer (and then they wind up all looking the same).

A 35 story office tower should be pretty substantial in this area.

Somewhere close to 150 meters.

Am I the only person here who thinks that this project could be larger in scale?

Yonge and Eg has the Yonge line and should have the Eglinton Crosstown line beneath it some time in the future.

With that sort of infrastructure that area would be a good spot for intensification.

Wait are they just building this one 35 story building or all of them in that render?

Am I the only person here who thinks that this project could be larger in scale?


No. I also think the same way. 35 stories. ONLY? Why? In London, they have the same situation but instead of building something squat they decide to build a 310m skyscraper in The Shard.

http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/9100/shardfk5.jpg

This building should be no shorter than 250m. It is right beside the bus terminus and subway entrance. No where in the world would land owners / city planners give up such valuable land to yield so little return.

To say this building is disappointing is an understatement. Not only height wise but the design looks so boring.

No. I also think the same way. 35 stories. ONLY? Why? In London, they have the same situation but instead of building something squat they decide to build a 310m skyscraper in The Shard.

This building should be no shorter than 250m. It is right beside the bus terminus and subway entrance. No where in the world would land owners / city planners give up such valuable land to yield so little return.

So...what you're saying is that nothing other than 250m towers exist beside the thousands of subway stations around the world? :lol: The Shard is a mega-budget project in one of London's most important locations and will be the city's new tallest. Its more comparable to the likes of 1 Bloor or Aura, and not every tower can be like that. Thats not how economics works.

I too, would like to see a better designed, more substantial tower here, but ultimately it comes to the developers. If they can't build a 250m tower designed by some "starchitect", then they can't, and the city can't force them to, unless they want nothing at all. And I personally, would rather take a mediocre 35-storey tower than nothing at all. I don't think this is even the final plan though, just the city's concept of what will go there.

http://www.toronto.ca/planning/images/yonge_eg_rendering_lg.jpg

I like all the little towers, great scale and density, and they look much more liveable and upscale than a lot of the fatass monoliths going up in the city. Are the office blocks existing? They don't look very developed visually in the other renders.

In London, they have the same situation but instead of building something squat they decide to build a 310m skyscraper in The Shard.

.

Well, if it ever gets built, that is. The demolition of existing building is taking forever. I would not be surprised if it does not go up.

Ok, maybe not 250m, but what I meant was something substantial.

I personally, would rather take a mediocre 35-storey tower than nothing at all. I don't think this is even the final plan though, just the city's concept of what will go there.

I would rather it sit undeveloped until a development which has the density and design to match this location can be created. Once construction is completed on this 35 storey building it will be here for how many years? 50? 100? At least an undeveloped patch of land is an opportunity for something better.

hmm ... I think you all must consider the market trend and demand in this area before calling for a 250m building lol ...

The Yonge and Eglinton area has been fairly stable over the past how many ever years. Even with the decrease in vacancy levels over the last 5 years or so (ending this past summer I suppose) there wasn't enough new demand to merit new buildings at this location. Moreover, given the fact a large amount of the current inventory will become available once Canadian tire moves to North York it is unlikely that even 35 story office building would manage to lease most of the space.

Why? I'm not sure, the location is great in my mind but I think large business prefer the campus style developments available on large plots of land in the 905. Smaller businesses are probably priced out of this area for the most part.

Y&E seems to be very stable in good and bad times ... never dropping below a certain % lease with a substantial subleasing opportunities available.

I'm not sure what it will take to make this area hot and in demand. There's probably nothing. Anyway, given all that a 20-35 story office building is probably feasible for a developer with large pockets. I can't see much of the space being occupied quickly but eventually it probably will be ... but it will be a while with Canadian tire moving out.

The rendering is a bit misleading, as it clearly shows a smaller building than the 35 story office building mentioned. A 35 story office tower would be taller than the tallest office tower at YEC, and probably as tall as the tallest Minto tower.

The render shown makes the intersection look a bit odd, as it clearly screams for a taller tower...and probably the "focal point" building of the entire Yonge-Eglinton cluster at that. From a purley functional standpoint, it makes sense, as it is sitting right on the subway station.

I agree speculating on a large class-A office building bigger than what is proposed for such a secondary market is a bit risky, so I really don't suggest it grow bigger by adding more office space.

Instead, I propose they make it a mixed-use building by adding condos to the top of the office portion. They don't need to try to increase density, but instead transfer all the units planned for that new "block" in the south-west corner of the site, on Duplex.

Instead of the mid-rise structures shown, plus that small parkette, I propose they build a proper park on the whole block, which will act as a better buffer between the residential blocks and the new Eglinton Station high density project. I'm sure the ever-vocal NIMBYs in the area would be much happier, not to mention a proper little park in the area is needed anyway (small parkettes are a nice idea, but tend to not be well used).

Also, these condos are not likely to have direct indoor access to the subway station and retail located east of it. By transferring these condo units to the top of the office tower, would make them more attractive, as they would have better views and direct access to the subway and all the retail attached, and would probably sell faster and at better prices.

Transferring those 200ish (estimate) units to the top of the office tower, using some kind of set-back for the residential component, would add at least 25-30 floors to the 35 floors of office, yielding a pretty impressive tower (good design is being assumed here), in a location very nicely suited to it. I don't see the height being an issue, as in that location, shadowing effects are not likely to affect any of the low-rise, residential streets nearby.



KGB

It says 35 plus podium portion, so I guess we can assume 38-40 floors. I wish more though. Minto set a good precedent and with the subway line being right there, we could push 70-90 stories and there should not be a problem. That's not going to happen though of course, just a fantasy.

Project: proposed const of a 35-storey office tower with a podium to house retail components. This project will be built above Eglington Subway station.

hahaha. Rookie.

I'm not sure about the latter two, but the first render is the city's, not the developer's. The rendering was done for the Yonge-Englinton Secondary Plan, so none of what gets built will likely look the same.

Way too small, modest, and suburban. This is another major Toronto node in the making like Yonge/Bloor. In 20 years they'll be kicking themselves if this gets built. I agree with Homer and Skybeam; this should be much taller. 250-400 metres. When I first saw it, I thought these were plans for Markham or Vaughn. They need to stop thinking of Toronto as some run of the mill, forgettable, cookie cutter city. Toronto is an emerging global powerhouse of a city. Planners need to start building with this mindset.

Skybeam: it was very fitting that you posted a pic of the Shard in London. People need to shake off their mediocre perceptions of what is suitable for Toronto. If Toronto is to stake its place amongst the great cities, we need to start building like we belong there. This building just won't do. Too many hillbillies still in the planning department, I suppose.

So...what you're saying is that nothing other than 250m towers exist beside the thousands of subway stations around the world? :lol: The Shard is a mega-budget project in one of London's most important locations and will be the city's new tallest. Its more comparable to the likes of 1 Bloor or Aura, and not every tower can be like that. Thats not how economics works.


Who cares what is built next to most subway stations around the world? That's exactly the mentality that is so stifling and frustrating. It's also what cities used to following someone else's lead do. The cities that will lead the world tomorrow plot their own course.

It also doesn't matter that the Shard will be London's tallest. This is Toronto, and Yonge/Eglinton will be a massive transportation hub in the coming decades. Skybeam was right to have the foresight to realize that 250m + was what this site begs for. Why is it necessary to pull so many Torontonians kicking and screaming into the 21st Century?

You shouldn't laugh at people who have that foresight. They're exactly the type of people Toronto needs. What we need less of is people ridiculing those who recognize short sighted thinking. This is just one more sign of Toronto's growing pains. The city is developing so quickly, many locals are still on page 2 while the city is already on page 47.

Sorry monkey, but this is frustrating. It's like pulling teeth sometimes to get people to reset their parameters. Londoners ridiculed New York for their audacity back in the 1920s, then got passed. Now we ridicule places like Dubai. Guess what? Dubai is going to be one of those cities that lead the world. We need to stop following, and start leading by example. London seems to be able to stay at the top of the heap by constantly re-inventing itself. This is a lesson that needs to become part of Toronto's culture if we are to become one of those cities, and stay there.

^^ It's not like "if only we think big then it'll happen magically", there's issues of supply/demand, reason why no one is proposing a 1000 footer is because the market doesn't need one there yet, and definintely not before much more suitable proposals like 1 Bloor. The village scheme above is something that can be implemented incrementally (like how cities are supposed to develop), so no sudden glut of 10,000 units or 3 million square feet of office to assume risk for. I'm personally not in a hurry to erect edifaces in this city... it's by no means a measure of greatness, just look at the gaudish madness in China, and then compare to Amsterdam.

Skybeam: it was very fitting that you posted a pic of the Shard in London. People need to shake off their mediocre perceptions of what is suitable for Toronto. If Toronto is to stake its place amongst the great cities, we need to start building like we belong there. This building just won't do. Too many hillbillies still in the planning department, I suppose.

Who cares what is built next to most subway stations around the world? That's exactly the mentality that is so stifling and frustrating. It also doesn't matter that the Shard will be London's tallest. This is Toronto, and Yonge/Eglinton will be a massive transportation hub in the coming decades. Skybeam was right to have the foresight to realize that 250m + was what this site begs for. Why is it necessary to pull so many Torontonians kicking and screaming into the 21st Century?

You shouldn't laugh at people who have that foresight. They're exactly the type of people Toronto needs. What we need less of is people ridiculing those who recognize short sighted thinking. This is just one more sign of Toronto's growing pains. The city is developing so quickly, many locals are still on page 2 while the city is already on page 47.


You're way too idealistic.

We'd all love a Shard here. However, not every building can be of that caliber. Not in Toronto, not in London, not in any city anywhere in the universe, and certainly not at this point in history (what with the global economic slowdown and possible recession) and at this location. There is not the demand. Economics are quite simple. Buildings like the Shard get built because there is the demand for the space and the necessity for design to be competitive. Buildings of that height are also more expensive than building multiple smaller highrises, unless land values are absurdly high, which they are not in Toronto.

Also, city planning = more than building shit as tall as possible. On one side of this development are detached 2-floor homes. On the other side, ~100 m buildings. Sticking a 250-400 m building there would be ridiculous from an aesthetic, contextual, and economic standpoint. Maybe in the future when its surrounded by other towers, but high-rise districts, like anywhere, need to grow organically out of need for space, not crass planning attempts at appearing "worldly".

And again: who is going to build this mythical 400 m tower? Be realistic, please. The impossibility of this tower of yours has nothing to do with "hillbilly" city planners or the inhabitants of the city - it has everything to do with the market, and the market doesn't demand it.

Way too small, modest, and suburban. This is another major Toronto node in the making like Yonge/Bloor. In 20 years they'll be kicking themselves if this gets built. I agree with Homer and Skybeam; this should be much taller. 250-400 metres. When I first saw it, I thought these were plans for Markham or Vaughn. They need to stop thinking of Toronto as some run of the mill, forgettable, cookie cutter city. Toronto is an emerging global powerhouse of a city. Planners need to start building with this mindset.

Skybeam: it was very fitting that you posted a pic of the Shard in London. People need to shake off their mediocre perceptions of what is suitable for Toronto. If Toronto is to stake its place amongst the great cities, we need to start building like we belong there. This building just won't do. Too many hillbillies still in the planning department, I suppose.



Who cares what is built next to most subway stations around the world? That's exactly the mentality that is so stifling and frustrating. It also doesn't matter that the Shard will be London's tallest. This is Toronto, and Yonge/Eglinton will be a massive transportation hub in the coming decades. Skybeam was right to have the foresight to realize that 250m + was what this site begs for. Why is it necessary to pull so many Torontonians kicking and screaming into the 21st Century?

You shouldn't laugh at people who have that foresight. They're exactly the type of people Toronto needs. What we need less of is people ridiculing those who recognize short sighted thinking. This is just one more sign of Toronto's growing pains. The city is developing so quickly, many locals are still on page 2 while the city is already on page 47.

God, this is frustrating. It's like pulling teeth.

I really don't see what you're getting at ... the comment above is along the right lines.

First let me state, I love Y&E ... heck If I can manage it I'll be moving there from NYCC this summer! :)

But the issue here simply comes down to supply and demand. As I said if you ignore the last 4/5 months or so we've been in a very good economic situation; Seeing office vacancy rates decline and a lot of new supply planned and/or constructed. Throughout this entire time there wasn't much of a push to add new office space to the midtown node. Yes vacancy rates fell but they've always been fairly low in Y&E. Still though there isn't much demand for new large contiguous space.

Why? I have no idea ... it seems to be a perfect location to me. A couple guesses are the rental rates / land cost / want for large suburban like campus developments.

Anyway, the point is the demand is not there. I think NYCC is an even better example. It's probably even more suited for very concentrated office space development. Yet in the last 5/10 years we only saw the completion of one office building. This took place even before the current boom.

Why? I'm not sure, maybe the same reasons apply here. The point is it seems the demand for most of the new office space is either downtown or out in the suburbs (Hi-way 7 - Lesile node, Airpot, Vaughn)

Now if you're arguing that there should be a mixed development here. Maybe 1000foot ... but most of that being residential then sure ... that's fine.

^^ It's not like "if only we think big then it'll happen magically", there's issues of supply/demand, reason why no one is proposing a 1000 footer is because the market doesn't need one there yet, and definintely not before much more suitable proposals like 1 Bloor.

Then don't develop Yonge/Eglinton now. Develop it 10 years from now.

You're way too idealistic.


Perhaps, but cities need a good dose of that to awaken people to what is possible. Not every building will be a masterpiece, but the City has very clearly stated that the growth in the Horseshoe and the GTA will be marked by increased density in already established areas, and massive density clusters at key transportation nodes. Yonge/Eglinton is one of those mega cluster nodes. Yonge/Bloor is one, as is MCC.

I would have to disagree regarding there being no hillbillies on the planning committees in this city. Some of them are total dinosaurs in their world view. We even have substantial representation on these boards/committees by rural Ontarians who think Orono is an urban area. They are influencing decisions affecting Toronto's development while having little understanding of large cities and their needs.

A good third of them are woefully ill equipped to be making the important decisions facing Toronto. It that sense, they are hillbillies.

Then don't develop Yonge/Eglinton now. Develop it 10 years from now.

It'll develop when and how the market dictates. If there is a need right now for 35-stories worth of office space in that area, then thats what will (and should) be built. Canceling this to wait for things to get better in the future is an incredibly regressive policy and will only lead to decline. If 10 years from now, 100-stories worth of space is needed, then it'll be built. If not, then it won't, simple as that.


I would have to disagree regarding there being no hillbillies on the planning committees in this city. Some of them are total dinosaurs in their world view.

I do agree with you there, though in this case, they are irrelevant. Having nothing but "progressive" planners wouldn't change this.

Also, city planning = more than building shit as tall as possible. On one side of this development are detached 2-floor homes. On the other side, ~100 m buildings. Sticking a 250-400 m building there would be ridiculous from an aesthetic, contextual, and economic standpoint. Maybe in the future when its surrounded by other towers, but high-rise districts, like anywhere, need to grow organically out of need for space, not crass planning attempts at appearing "worldly".

And again: who is going to build this mythical 400 m tower? Be realistic, please. The impossibility of this tower of yours has nothing to do with "hillbilly" city planners or the inhabitants of the city - it has everything to do with the market, and the market doesn't demand it.

Agreed.

It would be nice to see some 500-600 footers along NYCC though, since it looks kinda flat currently, like Burnaby's skyline, lol.

400m tower would be nice but def not at young and eglinton.. it would have to be downtown in the core. maybe across from ACC in 10 years when that land gets developed who knows. But I Agree it doesnt make sense to build towers out in the suburbs.. They should never have started that trend in the first place.. Maybe I can see towers arround certain destinations Scar Town , or Square One. But toronto has random towers everywhere. Its plain silly. If all the towers were downtown think of how well built up our city would have become by now. It would have been more pedestrian friendly and more vibrant. Of course we would have to leave room for office towers as well but it would have helped our transpertation our highways our infrastructure. Orig Point 400m Downtown Good. 400m suburb BAD.

It'll develop when and how the market dictates. If there is a need right now for 35-stories worth of office space in that area, then thats what will (and should) be built. Canceling this to wait for things to get better in the future is an incredibly regressive policy and will only lead to decline. If 10 years from now, 100-stories worth of space is needed, then it'll be built. If not, then it won't, simple as that.


I understand supply and demand issues, but not everything should be decided purely by those criteria. If it were, we wouldn't deem urban planners as important and we'd end up with a city that looked like Houston. Planning is important and becoming more and more so as our cities become larger and we attempt to make these urban areas more livable.

If a 35 story office space is required at Yonge/Eglinton, don't build it right on the intersection, but a few blocks away. This corner where the subway station sits should be reserved for the eventual need that will arise here. It's an incredible waste of money and resources to build something that won't meet the needs of the area in a few short decades.

We'll probably end up with 2 subway lines passing through this intersection in the not too distant future. Look at Yonge and Bloor. The Bay and CIBC developments are testament to short sighted planning. They are woefully inadequate for the needs of the area and only 30 years old. Cumberland Terrace? Do we want to learn from past mistakes, or repeat them?

We might end up having to knock the entire Bay tower complex down and build a far larger structure that not only more closely meets the needs of the area, but the subway station below is another development that will have to go through a similar rebuild. That's going to be tremendously disruptive and costly for Toronto. Do we really want to be facing the same issues at Yonge/Eglinton in 2040?

I believe this is why Skybeam, Homer, and I see the need for the planning department to do what they are being paid to do. They need to step in and ensure the right development goes here. This is one of the most important sites in the GTA. They need to put their foot down.

I don't think Skybean's intention was to really propose a structure that is 100-150M taller than anything in the area but I will leave Skybean and ISaidSo to speak for themselves.

It certainly was not what I was thinking of too.

I was more thinking that this project needed to be more like a B-A type mixed use development that is done in phases to allow for the market to dictate the schedule. This coupled with the city agreeing to greater densities in these key nodes would be advantageous. (Same goes with raising the maximum height restrictions in NYCC but that is a different thread)

To just clarify this even further.... I'm not looking for a great work of art here, just a development that is practical for it's surroundings. Y&E and even Eglinton a few blocks in each direction could easily become a place to both live and work for thousands more along the lines of NYCC if done right.

I understand supply and demand issues, but not everything should be decided purely by those criteria. If it were, we wouldn't deem urban planners as important and we'd end up with a city that looked like Houston. Planning is important and becoming more and more so as our cities become larger and we attempt to make these urban areas more livable.

Houston is a result of no zoning. Planners should enforce basic guidelines for private developers to follow, but ultimately, it comes to them. Micromanaging the exact height of a building is beyond their jurisdiction, and by doing so, are ultimately going to cause a loss of employment in the city. If they developer wants 35-stories worth of space here, but the city wants them to build more, they will simply take their business elsewhere.

Also, since you mention livability - if anything, this tower will create for a more "livable" environment that what you propose.


If a 35 story office space is required at Yonge/Eglinton, don't build it right on the intersection, but a few blocks away.

But a few blocks away are a number of privately owned residences. Here we have a vacant bus depot. There is no reason why people should be expropriated from their homes when there is vacant land right there. IT should be developed first, and will provide a catalyst for further intensification west of Duplex.


400m tower would be nice but def not at young and eglinton.. it would have to be downtown in the core. maybe across from ACC in 10 years when that land gets developed who knows. But I Agree it doesnt make sense to build towers out in the suburbs.. They should never have started that trend in the first place.. Maybe I can see towers arround certain destinations Scar Town , or Square One. But toronto has random towers everywhere. Its plain silly. If all the towers were downtown think of how well built up our city would have become by now. It would have been more pedestrian friendly and more vibrant. Of course we would have to leave room for office towers as well but it would have helped our transpertation our highways our infrastructure. Orig Point 400m Downtown Good. 400m suburb BAD.

Yonge & Eglinton is not a suburb. And building "towers" in the suburbs makes perfect sense. Though when it comes to a 400 m building, there should be other towers first that build up to that, not down from it.

And no, having all of Toronto's towers downtown would not make it more pedestrian friendly, just the opposite in fact. Have you ever walked around an area like Thorncliffe or Jane Street? Not pedestrian friendly at all with that style of development. Even within downtown, areas like Kensington or Queen St. are much more pedestrian friendly than the CBD.

But toronto has random towers everywhere. Its plain silly. If all the towers were downtown think of how well built up our city would have become by now. It would have been more pedestrian friendly and more vibrant.

Got a number of problems with those statements...

Toronto is somewhat unique in the fact that we do have a very large amount of highrises in total, with a very high concentration in the downtown core (not so uncommon), with even more outside of the core (much more uncommon). But most of them are not random. They tend to be nodal clusters focused on TOD. This is why Toronto has consistently good interconnected public transit, with high ridership.

If all our highrises were confined to the downtown core, how could the city be built up? Only the downtown core would be, with the rest of the city ( 95% of it) would just be low density sprawl & industrial. And I don't see how the city would benefit from that in terms of being pedestrian friendly or vibrant.

Our downtown core is all ready extremely well built up, pedestrian friendly and vibrant, and aside from perhaps Manhattan, no other city in NA, or few in the world for that matter, has as much residential population in its downtown core as Toronto does.

It's this 95% of the rest of the city, developed mostly post-war, that requires careful planning to make it as urban as possible, and we haven't half bad it so far...we need to keep working on it. The downtown core is doing just fine, as it has a very good base, and will attract more of the same by virtue of itself.



KGB

^^

Agreed. I think the goal should be to build up this nodal points into significant urban clusters in their own right.

Toronto is a city orbited by cities.

I think one of the reasons for the lack of office demand in Toronto is the high-property tax rates and the high valuations that buildings get. If you build an office in Vaughan/Markham/Mississauga, then company pays less taxes. Also, in quite many cases when a company chooses to move, the employer may do a survey to see where the employees live and choose to move closer. Often the employees live in the suburbs due to cheaper and larger housing. While it is good to see employment in the suburbs, we also badly need employment in the city. Developments is a symptom in the problem of getting around the GTA. Ten years ago the traffic towards the city in the morning was heavy but going outside the city it was very light. Fast forward to 2008, and the traffic is almost even going both ways. More residents now live in Toronto, but many of them now work in the 905 area.

This is a cause of the infrastructure to get around the city being almost full. Transit has not expanded in years if not decades. The only real increase in transit supply to the downtown has been extra GO service. TTC service is only now catching up to the levels of the late 1980's. Hopefully once the subway extensions are built, more GO train lines and better service, and the Transit City routes are operational, we will see move commercial investment in the city. There is a reason the core has a dense area of employment. That is due to the subway and passenger rail nearby.

The city's move to reduce commercial property tax rates will also help.

I think one of the reasons for the lack of office demand in Toronto is the high-property tax rates and the high valuations that buildings get. If you build an office in Vaughan/Markham/Mississauga, then company pays less taxes. Also, in quite many cases when a company chooses to move, the employer may do a survey to see where the employees live and choose to move closer. Often the employees live in the suburbs due to cheaper and larger housing. While it is good to see employment in the suburbs, we also badly need employment in the city. Developments is a symptom in the problem of getting around the GTA. Ten years ago the traffic towards the city in the morning was heavy but going outside the city it was very light. Fast forward to 2008, and the traffic is almost even going both ways. More residents now live in Toronto, but many of them now work in the 905 area.

This is a cause of the infrastructure to get around the city being almost full. Transit has not expanded in years if not decades. The only real increase in transit supply to the downtown has been extra GO service. TTC service is only now catching up to the levels of the late 1980's. Hopefully once the subway extensions are built, more GO train lines and better service, and the Transit City routes are operational, we will see move commercial investment in the city. There is a reason the core has a dense area of employment. That is due to the subway and passenger rail nearby.

The city's move to reduce commercial property tax rates will also help.

Isn't it a good thing that traffic both ways is similar? That way we actually are maximizing our infrastructure. Roads need to be just a thick on both sides anyway due to rush hour traffic going one direction in the morning and another direction at night. As well all public transit has vehicles that need to go from one end to the other and back. By making sure both sides are completely filled, it's actually a good thing because we're maximizing that investment.

Let's check back in another decade...

http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/11/02/information-booth-whats-up-with-the-abandoned-ttc-bus-terminal-at-yonge-and-eglinton/#more-105550

Information Booth: What’s up with the abandoned TTC bus terminal at Yonge and Eglinton?

Peter Kuitenbrouwer Nov 2, 2011 – 4:13 PM ET


“After a little more than 50 years, the concrete deteriorated to the point where it was unsafe,” explains Graham Tulett, project manager in the TTC property development department. “There was a fear that the slab would collapse.” In 2004, the TTC moved all buses serving Eglinton station to a temporary terminal to the south. Since then the bus terminal has sat unused.

The TTC planned to repair the abandoned bus terminal; now, the TTC plans to demolish it and use the site as a staging area for offices and earth movers as it digs the new Eglinton Crosstown light rail line.

“This is a key location for actually constructing the LRT,” Mr. Tulett says. “And it is likely to be the extraction point for our tunnel boring machines.” Domenic Garisto, the TTC’s chief property development officer, estimates the LRT job will stretch through 2019.

“We gotta put the transit stuff in first, and the rest we can convey to Build Toronto for development,” Mr. Garisto says. Mr. Sonshine will have to wait at least a decade to see anything permanent built at that spot.