Correct me if i'm wrong, but won't the entrance be from the east side of the street on bathurst directly north of the gardiner? If you pass by the area you can see a long walkway already constructed.
 
I have quite a bit of sympathy for 3Dementia's comments about parks - brought to mind by the diagrams for the June Callwood park. Not that some of them don't seem cool, but is there anything wrong with a bit o' grass, trees and benches, a largely unprogrammed area? I found the designs for that park, and perhaps for this one too, to be a bit overwrought, and I always wonder how well they will be kept up.
 
teryaki said:
Correct me if i'm wrong, but won't the entrance be from the east side of the street on bathurst directly north of the gardiner? If you pass by the area you can see a long walkway already constructed.
Click to expand...

I think you might be referring to Fort York Blvd. The Park will not be adjacent to Bathurst, but a block to the west. The Park's western edge will be and extension of Dan Leckie Way, where the white trailer is parallel to Bathurst.

DSC03762.jpg

(sorry for reposting the picture)

I42 - thanks for moving all the posts to this thread
 
marcus_a_j said:
I think you might be referring to Fort York Blvd. The Park will not be adjacent to Bathurst, but a block to the west. The Park's western edge will be and extension of Dan Leckie Way, where the white trailer is parallel to Bathurst.
Click to expand...

So what's the piece of land west of the white trailer? Any construction going on there? Thanks.
 
TOBoy said:
So what's the piece of land west of the white trailer? Any construction going on there? Thanks.
Click to expand...

To my knowledge the two blocks between the park and Bathurst south of Fort York Blvd (33 and 37) will be medium density residential according to the Railway Lands West Secondary. The built form will be similar to what is already being built around CityPlace with podiums forming the streetwall with towers rising at the intersections. Here is an image from the Block 32/36 thread that gives a general idea of what will be.

2368393970_31d2152bf3_b.jpg


The Railway Lands West Urban Design Guidelines also give some insight as to what will be built. It was produced in 2004 so what is there is not necessarily what will be built, as has already been seen. There is a height limit of 45 metres on the two blocks, which I think will change. I don't know who owns the land, but it's not the City, which owns land in Blocks 31, 32, and 36 where TCHC is building their housing projects and where the schools are going. Most likely we'll see market-priced condos sometime down the road to eventually fill the rest of the area. I'm hoping it's later rather than sooner because it will mean Amsterdam Brewery might be gone.
 
Archivist said:
I have quite a bit of sympathy for 3Dementia's comments about parks - brought to mind by the diagrams for the June Callwood park. Not that some of them don't seem cool, but is there anything wrong with a bit o' grass, trees and benches, a largely unprogrammed area? I found the designs for that park, and perhaps for this one too, to be a bit overwrought, and I always wonder how well they will be kept up.
Click to expand...

This is large a modernist versus postmodernist debate. Sure, after fifty years the appeal of the new ideas may wear off, but these are thoughtful and engaging designs. At one point they'll be rediscovered too. The greatest won't fall out of favour for too long. May the innovation continue.

It's also a bit weird that this discussion is even happening given the fact that large open spaces landscaped by leading contemporaries, and surrounded by density aren't anything new. I think of the "central park" concept.
 
Thanks for posting Marcus.


3Dementia said:
I remain unconvinced that "clever" parks like this (and hTo, Sugar Beach etc.) will stand the test of time...
Click to expand...

Good post 3D. Furthermore, watching Obama's acceptance speach in Grant Park/Chicago last night it dawns on me how necessary an open park/meeting space is, all the more so in a democracy. Coupland's park looks to be an accomplishment in terms of high design, but given the location and its size a large central gathering space may have been a bigger gift to the city as I cannot think of another space where large impromptu crowds can gather, whether in anger or joy. Dundas Square and NPS are limited in size and aside from fringe green areas like High Park or Downsview Park I can't think of a space in the central city that can perform this function.
 
There's lots of Greenspace at Roundhouse Park just a ways down the street from Coupland's park too, lots of people can fit on Queen's Park's lawn, as can on the U of T's Front and Back Campuses...

but no, we have nothing the size of Grant Park's open space in the core of this city.

42
 
I look at the Island as Toronto's great park. In the summer the ferrys are packed with people going to enjoy the warm weather, like Central Park gets packed in the summer. Granted taking a ferry there isn't as easy as, let's say, walking in, but it's a nice change from the hustle and bustle of the city.

The Island is an oasis in and of itself right across the harbour, and who can argue with the view.
 
Pre-Coupdevilleland, the original Cityplace scribbles had just such an open space, albeit functional space such as soccer fields, baseball diamonds etc.

Mind you those who read posts will note that I was proposing NOT to have such "clever" or any other major open space here... just don't think this will ever be a gathering place of any significance.

So, I'd rather fill it (Cityplace) in completely (except for my aforementioned substantial east west linear park)... and see if this planned "neighbourhood" can morph/shape-shift over time into a real neighbourhood due to the critical mass of human life forms there.
 
Pinkie said:
I look at the Island as Toronto's great park.
Click to expand...

I completely agree. And I'd love to take it one step further and abolish the Airport once a fixed-rail link from Union to Pearson is established. Replace the Airport with parkland, rec faciltities/fields and other attractions to create a vibrant park. I'd even go on step-further and add a street-car and footbridge connecting Bathurst St. to the Island to make it accessible all the time. That, however, is a fantasy.
 
Furthermore, watching Obama's acceptance speach in Grant Park/Chicago last night it dawns on me how necessary an open park/meeting space is, all the more so in a democracy.
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same thing, having watched the spectacular crowd at Grant Park on TV. I was thinking perhaps we can turn the huge expanse of parking lot at Exhibition Place into a lawn for such a purpose. The Portlands would also be a nice place for one (might come in handy as a future Olympic venue in the Portlands). Otherwise we can follow Chicago's example by infilling part of our harbour to make land for a lawn on the central waterfront.

One big criticism with having such a space on the central waterfront is probably the same criticism we have for Nathan Phillip Square... it is only well-used for special events (like New Year's Eve), but at other times it is empty and windswept. There is a tension between whether we should have a big, open, "democratic" space that can fit tens of thousands of people for only special events, or should we stick with smaller, cluttered, amenities-packed spaces that would be well-used every day of the year.
 
Nathan Phillip Square is used for many many many events throughout the year so I don't think that's a good example. In the winter the skating rink is used daily and in the summer on nice days.

Either way I see your point if such a place was built at CityPlace.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top