I went two months ago, and then a few days ago,and it appears no one is maintaining the park. The green grass is now full of weeds, and the hills around the red canoe are also full of weeds. The slope of the hill is too steep to ever incorporate any kind of sitting area on it. The water "jets" were on, but they look more like the sprinklers shooting up after being run over by the lanwmower.
 
What a bunch of morose complainers. I'd hate to be on the party planning committe in your company. For God's sake 20 years ago standard fare would have been a patch of grass, 4 benches and a garbage bin. Is this an Olmstead Park? No. Is it significantly better than average, absolutely.

I think the choice was either pure recreation - basketball, soccer, tennis or something like what we have now. They went this way, and its a good effort. It will improve with time.
 
You're easily satisfied I guess? Did you see the original drawings? Did you see the ads? The tv ads advertised it like Central Park. It's nothing compared to Central Park. And this one differs away from the original drawings. If it was similar, then I would say it comes somewhat close to a Central Park.

Scans of the brochure version of the Park. If you notice on the left side, there's a large water feature there.

http://urbantoronto.ca/showthread.php?600-CityPlace-Canoe-Landing-Park-%28Douglas-Coupland-Phillips-Farevaag-Smallengerb%29&p=234071#post234071

Model of the Park.
img0211bcm.jpg
 
I am not impossible to satisfy.

If you were actually expecting Central Park, then I can understand your let down...wait a sec, were you actually expecting Central Park??

Anyway, once the trees grow in it will look pretty much like the photo you attached, which isn't that spectacular anyway.
 
AKS said:
The tv ads advertised it like Central Park. It's nothing compared to Central Park.
Click to expand...

Well, duh! Have you ever seen Central Park? (According to Wiki: Central Park covers an area of 843 acres (3.41 km2; 1.317 sq mi). It is 2.5 miles (4 km) long between 59th Street (Central Park South) and 110th Street (Central Park North), and 0.5 miles (0.8 km) wide between Fifth Avenue and Central Park West.) It has 25 million visitors a year.

Did you really expect that this Park would or could somehow emulate that?

(BTW, I think it's an OK park that will get much better as the trees and plants mature.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, I wasn't expecting a full blown central park. We don't have those around here. But I was expecting something better looking. Like flower beds, nicely designed walk ways, bigger better water feature, mini bridges, etc. Even Allan Gardens (much older park) looks better than this.

The water feature dam design really doesn't enhance anything. I would have preferred the original bigger square shape and perhaps have the water running down the strip a bit with some design and have a place for people to sit near it.
 
Last edited:
It's simply another missed opportunity. I'm hoping that the 2 new waterfront parks Sherbourne Commons and Sugar Beach are a lot better than this.
 
"It's simply another missed opportunity."

We are grateful for the infinite patience you bare in light of our imperfectly executed moral efforts. With time, we hope to reward your heavenly patience. I dont know how you bear this disapointment with such grace and dignity.
 
Sherbourne Commons looks very sophisticated in the renderings and from the construction so far, it looks like they're not cutting back. Canoe Landing follows the CityPlace paradigm. Start with renderings that suggest something exciting and cutting-edge. Then water it down and make some cuts for something that looks only slightly above average.
 
I was there on Friday. The displays describing the Terry Fox Mile have warped and are popping out of the frames. They've been secured with a few screws. All the flower beds are overgrown with weeds. The stairway is covered in litter and there is graffiti on the canoe. It is a park surrounded on three sides by construction and on the other by an expressway, so it's not surprising that it is a bit forlorn, but it looked much sadder a couple days ago than it did on the occasions when I've wandered through before. It's quite disappointing to see a brand new space fall so fast.
 
buildup said:
I am not impossible to satisfy.

If you were actually expecting Central Park, then I can understand your let down...wait a sec, were you actually expecting Central Park??

Anyway, once the trees grow in it will look pretty much like the photo you attached, which isn't that spectacular anyway.
Click to expand...

I haven't been there, and I can safely say just by looking at photos that it looks nothing like the renders or photos, even if the trees were grown in like that.
 
junctionist said:
Sherbourne Commons looks very sophisticated in the renderings and from the construction so far, it looks like they're not cutting back. Canoe Landing follows the CityPlace paradigm. Start with renderings that suggest something exciting and cutting-edge. Then water it down and make some cuts for something that looks only slightly above average.
Click to expand...

Above average ? CityPlace has just lowered the bar again. Of all the developments downtown, this huge project is the most disappointing because it promised so much more.
 
I think more money was spent on building the 'model' of the park than the park itself.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top