Where would the housing front Queen street? There's a row of historic buildings on this block.

You are correct that most of the block has desirable facades (not sure about the interiors)

Though, the building immediately beside this lot is an exception; and together w/the former KFC/Taco Bell would probably form a developable parcel.

1603296590539.png


That's roughly an 8,000ft2 floor plate.

But, there's no magic in this specific parcel; the developer bought this land as parks acquisition and if we are engaging in re-thinking the transaction, so that the Green P
site affords the park; and any acquisition serves housing; we can easily choose another area parcel.
 
You are correct that most of the block has desirable facades (not sure about the interiors)

Though, the building immediately beside this lot is an exception; and together w/the former KFC/Taco Bell would probably form a developable parcel.

View attachment 278221

That's roughly an 8,000ft2 floor plate.

But, there's no magic in this specific parcel; the developer bought this land as parks acquisition and if we are engaging in re-thinking the transaction, so that the Green P
site affords the park; and any acquisition serves housing; we can easily choose another area parcel.

I forgot about that one - yes, the SVP sports building is utterly expendable.
 
I forgot about that one - yes, the SVP sports building is utterly expendable.
There's plenty of sports stores in Queen West better than SVP Sports. Groovy and Getoutside are better sneaker stores than SVP Sports.
 
SVP has better deals though. You can get cool shoes for cheap!
I also shop at SVP Sports (sometimes for the shoes, sometimes for the other clothes).

SVP Sports often have great promotions such as "Buy $200 worth of merchandise, get an official Raptors 2019 NBA Champions cap free," which I have taken advantage of once.
 
Soooo, I was moseying through the carryover funding report to Budget Ctte today..........

And I found this:

1618949854219.png


It would Appear SVP is now destined by part of the park site envisioned for the KFC to the east.

1618949663864.png
 

Attachments

  • 1618949814486.png
    1618949814486.png
    10.3 KB · Views: 148
This is... unfortunate. The city has been moving mountains to protect the fine-grained character of streets like this. Here they’re bulldozing it.

This park will have no meaningful relationship with The Well, either.

We previously agreed; and I continue to hold the view that, this is not the proper siting of a new park for the area.

That said, this building is not in anyway architecturally redeeming.

At least, if the park continues to front Queen, it will now have a somewhat more functional footprint than was previously the case.

Though I would still prefer to see thoughtful intensification/housing (with fine-grained retail) on the Queen frontage and the park where the Green P is today (or on a portion of that site).

Alternatively, some of the more useless, and small parks that already exist nearby could be enlarged to a functional size.

ie. Randy Padmore Park

OR

I think an intelligent case could be made for growing the popular, but over-taxed Alexandra Park.
 
The loss of SVP will be really unfortunate, for the longest time they were looking for a location downtown and in my opinion they are a great retailer. Hopefully they will be able to find another location downtown, but i have my doubts with the skyhigh rents.

Having a parkette at this location is just next to useless.
 
The loss of SVP will be really unfortunate, for the longest time they were looking for a location downtown and in my opinion they are a great retailer. Hopefully they will be able to find another location downtown, but i have my doubts with the skyhigh rents.

Having a parkette at this location is just next to useless.

Share that view w/the Councillor.

The City will not give up the goal of a park nearby, nor surrender ownership of a newly acquired site.

But they might be persuaded to put the park elsewhere.
 
I think there's some value to smaller scale parks facing onto our main streets. I definitely wouldn't say they're useless. Since we don't do public squares here (alas) we do kind of need more open spaces near our main streets and commercial retail zones for people to hang out in, eat food from nearby places, as a place to meet up with someone, some place to sit and watch the world go by, etc.

And while preserving fine-grain retail is also very important, I think we can do both (and in this particular case the building lost is not a big loss architecturally so I think it's a good spot for this kind of thing). Including the KFC and this lot together it could I think be quite a good public space if designed well. If the Green P also becomes a park in the future that could also be good, or that might be a good site for getting in significant housing.

To me, having small public spaces intermixed between fine-grain storefronts is its own kind of compelling fine-grain element that allows people to hang out and spend time on our main streets more instead of just walking along a narrow sidewalk or going in some place. Especially as the city continues to grow and these streets become busier and busier and need some more overflow space, having a few public parks scattered throughout our main streets I think could really be nice.
 
This is a useless spot for a park or parkette. The parks department has come up with a random formula for determining parks deificiency and doesnt know what to do with all the money they are sitting on. Scadding Court and Alexandra Park are just up the street, why not make them better and more inviting. The problem with these main street parkettes is that the parks department only builds them, they do not do any programming or staffing so you end up with Lisgar park, or the 2 lil parkettes at Denison and ryerson ave. Whatever gets built here, it will probably suck and not alleviate and need for park and recreation space. But, the parks department will consider it a success to spend millions of dollars.
 
This is a useless spot for a park or parkette. The parks department has come up with a random formula for determining parks deificiency and doesnt know what to do with all the money they are sitting on. Scadding Court and Alexandra Park are just up the street, why not make them better and more inviting. The problem with these main street parkettes is that the parks department only builds them, they do not do any programming or staffing so you end up with Lisgar park, or the 2 lil parkettes at Denison and ryerson ave. Whatever gets built here, it will probably suck and not alleviate and need for park and recreation space. But, the parks department will consider it a success to spend millions of dollars.

That's not quite accurate.

This KFC building which started this site was actually purchased by a developer, not Parks.

It was purchased to satisfy the standard requirement for parks space associated with any development, but which in that particular case would not/could not be met on-site.

The developer does not have a power of expropriation. They have a mandate to find a comparable amount of land area; as they would have been required to give on-site; and to do so within proximity of the site they are developing.

The developer finds a site on the market, they check that the price is in their ballpark; they go to Parks with the tentative site who then agree to it (or not).

If Parks says yes, it's up to the developer to acquire the site; it is then signed over to the City to fulfill the obligation.

So, yes, Parks had a say on whether to accept this parcel; but they did not likely pick it.

(they have been known to make suggestions to developers from time to time though)

*****

Others could speak to whether there is a maximum distance from the development site that would be accepted.

Certainly, this is not my preferred location for a new park, as I've indicated.

But I think we need to be fair to Parks as to how this process works.

I agree that land adjacent to Alexandra Park would be preferable.

But that isn't what was brought to Parks to approve.

As to the additional acquisition..............I assume (but don't know) that having approved the original site, which we all agree was too small to be functional; the thought was to spend some acquisition money to make it large enough to be functional.

It's hard to disagree w/that logic; IF one is stuck on the idea of a park at this location.

*****

As a final note, as someone who knows several staff in PF&R; I don't think it's fair to broad-brush them as indifferent or incompetent.

Like any large organization, there are some excellent staff; some who are fine.........and some who ......perhaps would serve us all better...........in different jobs.

There are lots of good people there; though sometimes really frustrating decisions get made; for a host of reasons.

I won't let the department off the hook for one moment for some of their bigger goofs; as can be seen in the Problematic Park Design thread; found here:


But neither will I throw the entire department under the bus; because some decisions are poor.

The same department that sometimes delivers disappointing parks has brought us Berczy, St.James and Village of Yorkville Parks along with the Music Garden.

I think this decision, on balance, is in error.

But let's seek to correct it, or ameliorate it if we can.
 
Still doesn't change the fact that some of the benches at Alexandria are falling apart. When is that going to be addressed?
 

Back
Top