ladyscraper
man alive
Beautiful!
I love this forum so much. Only on urbantoronto do you see people saying a dirty hole in the ground is beautiful. (we are just well aware of what it means for the future)
Beautiful!
ML Square, Telus and 18 York have all contributed greatly to a once derilect neighbourhood - ICE will do so as well. All have their faults, but what redeems them are the high quality of their street-level materials and design. However, I can't help but find this entire corridor illustrative of Toronto's biggest problem: squandering prime planning opportunities.
Should there not have been a vision crafted for Bremner 10 years ago? Was a new street linking our baseball stadium with our hockey/basketball arena, lined with the our most famous tourist site, a historic park and our convention centre, not seen as a defining opportunity? Couldn't it have been, say, our Las Ramblas? Or a cafe-lined boulevard? Or a sports-lovers paradise of tailgate zones and outdoor event spaces? Or an extended, undulating, green park? Or something...anything? (Ideas would be appreciated....these are admittedly lame examples).
Luckily, the street has recovered from the horrific start of the condo beside the ICE site, with its hulking second story balcony hiding its dry cleaners and Subways, but it could have been so much more. Ignoring the injustices of the concrete, bunker-like parking lot entrances "welcoming" you to Roundhouse Park and the proposed Ripley's Aquarium that would be dismissed as tacky by any Tea Party-lovin' municipality, the area will succeed in spite of itself, as much of Toronto does - but how many more chances do we have to build signature areas, loved by locals and tourists alike? It should not be this hard...
The developer has agreed to dontae $350,000.00 to Ward 20 for affordable housing and community improvement to Roundhouse Park.202
I think this is a policy in Vancouver when it comes to a development. You must provide improvement to the public in order to develop. I don't hear this happening much in Toronto.
I think this is a policy in Vancouver when it comes to a development. You must provide improvement to the public in order to develop. I don't hear this happening much in Toronto.
Toronto has section 37 of its planning act, which says that in exchange for allowing a builder greater density or height, the city is to get money for community improvements or some new public amenity. Virtually every major development ends up providing the city with some improvements to the public. The beautiful Allen Lambert Galleria by Santiago Calatrava was result of such planning requirements. If you go to a community meeting about a major development, you can contribute ideas as to how the money should be spent or what the developer should provide: whether it's on parks and public spaces, public housing, art, streetscapes, etc.