Province’s waterfront Hearn site subject of sales talks
A representative for Ontario Power Generation confirmed talks are underway for a possible sale of the site.

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_h...rfront-hearn-site-subject-of-sales-talks.html

I dunno, this could be a big benefit in that we don't have to wait decades to know what will become of Hearn. Right now no one knows its future, yet we have plans to divert Broadview substantially to terminate there. Naturally there's other benefits to this veering of Broadview (like direct access to the McLeary precinct). But to make the Hearn Broadview's terminal focal point without having any idea what the Hearn could be seems brash. So hopefully in the next few years we'll have some idea.
 
I dunno, this could be a big benefit in that we don't have to wait decades to know what will become of Hearn. Right now no one knows its future, yet we have plans to divert Broadview substantially to terminate there. Naturally there's other benefits to this veering of Broadview (like direct access to the McLeary precinct). But to make the Hearn Broadview's terminal focal point without having any idea what the Hearn could be seems brash. So hopefully in the next few years we'll have some idea.
You are talking about something thats 25-50 year out at this time.

Until you get the mouth of the Don built, almost nothing can be done there since you have to built a totally new infrastructure for the whole area alone. You are looking at about 2025 for full regrading of the area to allow construction to start there. There are a few locations where construction can start now, but requires 4.5 meters of earth to be place on the existing site first since that will be the new grade level for the whole area.

The first phase was supposed to be under construction this fall with completion by 2019/20. Once done, then the new Cherry St can start to see construction including the new bridge subject to funds being in place then.

You can start planning the the area for Hearn site, but the city is looking at about 2050 for new infrastructure south of the shipping channel to the point they removed the plan LRT from the plan for that area. Extending Broadview over the Shipping channel is decades off and no one is sure if it will happen. Getting Broadview south of Eastern to Commissioner has a number of issues to be dealt with first before going to the Shipping Channel.

I don't class this area as part of the Lower Don Lands area, but the Portland area since 2004.
 
You are talking about something thats 25-50 year out at this time.
Agreed in general, disagreed in detail.

Until you get the mouth of the Don built, almost nothing can be done there since you have to built a totally new infrastructure for the whole area alone. You are looking at about 2025 for full regrading of the area to allow construction to start there.
In the flood zone, absolutely right, save that at the present rate of action and paucity of funding, I think it will be much later.

There are a few locations where construction can start now, but requires 4.5 meters of earth to be place on the existing site first since that will be the new grade level for the whole area.
Here's where there's a lot of contention. Neither of the 'studio' sites are on the flood plain, and the Hearn site can do pretty much as they please if they retain status under the Electricity Act of Ontario, the details of which will surely be a few newspaper articles yet to come.

Whether the expansion land for Pinewood would have a 'soil remediation' clause or not is a good question. Present use may discount that. Since Council has a cloak of secrecy surrounding that, some very pertinent questions need to be answered.

There's no doubt that the Hearn is highly polluted, mostly phenols I suspect, which readily leach in some forms. Re-use of the facility and/or grounds could be up and running quite soon, however. I do note that reports indicate the buyer of Lakeview would have to be responsible for site reclamation. Same might apply to Hearn, we'll have to see, details are still very sketchy.
 
Last edited:
Here's where there's a lot of contention. Neither of the 'studio' sites are on the flood plain, and the Hearn site can do pretty much as they please if they retain status under the Electricity Act of Ontario, the details of which will surely be a few newspaper articles yet to come.

The entirety of the Pinewood site even post-expansion is in the flood plain - you can look up the map from the UT article you've posted, however selectively.

AoD
 
The entirety of the Pinewood site even post-expansion is in the flood plain - you can look up the map from the UT article you've posted, however selectively.

AoD
Excellent. I was waiting for that. Then why is Council looking to lease it out for "35 years" by some reports? And looking to loan money to finance it? (You'll note that Pinewood still insists on "mixed zoning" (Res-Com) status for the lands it leases)

upload_2017-10-12_22-48-24.png

http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2017/fb/bgrd/backgroundfile-106372.pdf
 

Attachments

  • upload_2017-10-12_22-48-24.png
    upload_2017-10-12_22-48-24.png
    277.7 KB · Views: 474
Last edited:
Excellent. I was waiting for that. Then why is Council looking to lease it for "35 years" by some reports?

Let's not pretend you're waiting for that - you've made a mistake that you should have avoided if you had read the reports and articles you cite so liberally and have even a general sense of where the site is located vis-a-vis the broader port lands. And why not? It is identified as the core area of the creative industry precinct - you can refer to the map I've posted previously, which is drawn from the Oct 2 PW Hemson presentation (and the map itself is from the Port Lands Planning Framework) - I've also posted an older version pages back: http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/thread...-waterfront-toronto.3363/page-92#post-1236619

And no, please don't edit your post and dump a map that is already in your own posting (http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/thread...-waterfront-toronto.3363/page-98#post-1264974) an hour ago. It is a rather poor save.

AoD
 
Last edited:
OK, let's play this your way. "I made a mistake". Now why is the City looking to borrow money to buy the land (already in the public domain) to lease to Pinewood, and not disclose the details of doing so?

And how much of the "$B+" (which I also stated prior) is for the Lower Don Lands, and not the entire project? If Pinewood is now stymied in this attempt, which is clearly possible, it makes the Hearn look that much more viable.
 
OK, let's play this your way. "I made a mistake". Now why is the City looking to borrow money to buy the land (already in the public domain) to lease to Pinewood, and not disclose the details of doing so?

And how much of the "$B+" (which I also stated prior) is for the Lower Don Lands, and not the entire project? If Pinewood is now stymied in this attempt, which is clearly possible, it makes the Hearn look that much more viable.

Sheesh, did you read the report? There are other properties in question that is not Pinewood that are going into private hands. That's what the city wanted to buy:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...sale-in-bid-to-save-hollywood-north-1.4331372

The city report didn't name the actual property they wanted to snap up, but hinted at it (owner recently deceased) - the CBC report on the other hand named actual names. Look up where Showline is on the TPLC map:

http://tplc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/TPLC-MAP-February-2015-Website-version.jpg

AoD
 
You are talking about something thats 25-50 year out at this time.

Until you get the mouth of the Don built, almost nothing can be done there since you have to built a totally new infrastructure for the whole area alone. You are looking at about 2025 for full regrading of the area to allow construction to start there. There are a few locations where construction can start now, but requires 4.5 meters of earth to be place on the existing site first since that will be the new grade level for the whole area.

The first phase was supposed to be under construction this fall with completion by 2019/20. Once done, then the new Cherry St can start to see construction including the new bridge subject to funds being in place then.

You can start planning the the area for Hearn site, but the city is looking at about 2050 for new infrastructure south of the shipping channel to the point they removed the plan LRT from the plan for that area. Extending Broadview over the Shipping channel is decades off and no one is sure if it will happen. Getting Broadview south of Eastern to Commissioner has a number of issues to be dealt with first before going to the Shipping Channel.

I don't class this area as part of the Lower Don Lands area, but the Portland area since 2004.

To be fair to myself I didn't say something will be built soon, rather we may know what could be built soon. The buildout timelines could still be same, or slightly accelerated. But rather than some random/hopeful guess of what the governing party in power may want, with private ownership we may get a definitive answer of their plans. NFL stadium, NHL arena, indefinite film/studio space, large-scale residential, commercial etc. Right now with Prov ownership we don't know much, other than it's a lucrative asset (that they may want to sell soon).
 
Sheesh, did you read the report? There are other properties in question that is not Pinewood that are going into private hands. That's what the city wanted to buy:
Showline and Pinewood studios are two completely separate issues. Council wanted to lend to Ports Toronto to allow them to buy land to lease to Pinewood adjacent to their present site.

Deja Vu...

Speaking of "private hands"...
Lights, camera, lawsuit: Legal battle between Toronto's largest studios could hurt industry
November 4, 2011
11:06 PM EDT
[...]
Cinespace Studios, founded by Nick, Larry and Steve Mirkopoulos a quarter-century ago, is one of the original film studio firms in Toronto. It used the time-honoured model of converting old factories and warehouses into sound stages.
[...]
For several years, Cinespace has complained that the city unfairly subsidized a rival, which in 2008 opened a purpose-built film studio complex in the port lands, now called Pinewood Toronto Studios. The city-owned Toronto Economic Development Company (TEDCO) owns 20% of Pinewood. A consortium of private investors owns the remaining 80%.

And so Cinespace filed suit this year against TEDCO and the city in the Superior Court of Justice, alleging that a 2009 city council resolution, bylaw 411, which made the Toronto Economic Development Corp. a 20% owner in Pinewood, was illegal.

“It is the position of Cinespace that TEDCO and/or the City of Toronto has bonused [Pinewood] improperly, acted in bad faith, unfairly and in a discriminatory manner in enacting Bylaw 411, making it illegal and void,” Cinespace wrote in a statement of claim.

Cinespace relied to make its case on help from one of its fiercest competitors: Peter Lukas, the 80-year-old, cantankerous founder and owner of Toronto’s other film studio complex, Showline Studios, on Lake Shore Boulevard East, which he opened in 1990.

Mr. Lukas wears a wrinkled tweed jacket and a battered Stetson, which he boasts is bulletproof. Posters in the Showline foyer trumpet stars who have worked there: John Cusack, Vin Diesel, Bruce Willis, Michelle Pfeifer and Jackie Chan. Five years ago, Mr. Lukas asked TEDCO to tell him the details of its deals with Pinewood. TEDCO refused, and Mr. Lukas fought the case to the Ontario Court of Appeal, which sided with him; he finally got the documents at the end of 2009.

“I spent $130,000 of my own money getting the documents,” said Mr. Lukas, sitting in his windowless, binder-crammed office, after he poured me a cup of coffee. “Cinespace and Showline are competitors, but we work together in terrorizing the politicians.”

Mr. Lukas shared the documents that he pried out of TEDCO with Cinespace. Cinespace then filed them in court as part of its legal claim. These documents reveal details of TEDCO’s leases with Pinewood. For some reason, though, Volume 3 of Cinespace’s application record, which includes the lease documents, is missing from the legal file in the courthouse; I relied for this story on extra copies that Cinespace showed me.

A Letter of Intent dated Feb. 26, 2009 outlines two key ways Toronto financially supports Pinewood:

• TEDCO is obligated to loan Pinewood $9-million, interest-free for five years, with no requirements to pay down the principal during those five years;

• TEDCO is obligated to defer the minimum ground rent payable by Pinewood under the ground lease by 50% for the first five years after closing.

Secrecy is paramount, the document adds: “Rose, Filmport, TEDCO and the New Investors each agrees that it will not … make any press release or public announcement concerning the existence of this letter of intent … except to the extent compelled by law.”

There are some documents that the city continues to withhold; Jim Mirkopoulos of Cinespace, in his court affidavit, refers to a confidential attachment to a city staff report adopted by council on April 6, 2009, by which, Mr. Mirkopoulos says, the city loaned $6.7-million to TEDCO, which TEDCO used to buy a 20% share in the studio.

After TEDCO’s investment in Pinewood, the Government of Ontario this year found Pinewood eligible for a provincial loan, and Infrastructure Ontario loaned Pinewood $34.5-million, another cash infusion that has enraged Cinespace and Showline.

The other day when I spoke to Paul Bronfman, the chairman of Pinewood Toronto, he said he has a great relationship with the owners of Cinespace. And he added: “If they want to apply for an Infrastructure Ontario loan, tell them to get in line.” Pinewood did not comment on the Cinespace lawsuit.

In the spring, TEDCO’s lawyers asked the courts to “strike out and dismiss the Cinespace application.”

In June Mr. Justice Michael Penny dismissed TEDCO’s motion to throw out the lawsuit, and ordered TEDCO to pay Cinespace $12,500 in legal costs. Then in August, Judge Penny sided with the defendants, ordering Cinespace to rewrite its affidavit. While declining comment on the case, John Birch at Cassells Brock, a lawyer for Pinewood, did provide me a copy of the hand-written ruling.

“It is clear that Cinespace fundamentally objects to public funds being used to allegedly benefit and afford competitive advantages to private commercial enterprises to the alleged detriment of other local studios (aka Cinespace),” the judge wrote. “However, the challenge to the bylaw… should not be used as a platform to launch the policy grievances held by Cinespace’s owners over municipal involvement in the film industry for the last 16 years.”

Cinespace says it is now reworking its affidavit.

Mr. Lukas, meanwhile, worries that subsidies to Pinewood will push his studio and Cinespace out of business. “You are tilting the playing field, and if you tilt it a little more, the normal studio operators are going to slide off the board,” he said.

Cinespace, separately, has sued TEDCO for $10-million for evicting Cinespace in 2007 from Marine Terminal 28, south of Queens Quay Boulevard East (the studio used to film the movie Chicago), now site of the Corus Entertainment building. That case remains before the courts.

In the meantime Cinespace has purchased the former Consumers Glass factory on Kipling Avenue in Etobicoke, where the company is busy building studios, even as it frets about subsidies to Pinewood.

The other day I visited Cinespace studios on Booth Street in Leslieville, formerly a factory that cleaned uniforms. The parking lot held fewer than half a dozen cars. I met with Jim Mirkopoulos and his uncle, Nick Mirkopoulos. Nick, a founder of Cinespace, has moved on, and now owns a film studio in Chicago.

“People say, ‘Why go to Chicago? There is so much corruption there,’ ” laughs Mr. Mirkopoulos, his words thick with the accent of his native Greece. “And I say, ‘Yes, but at least in Chicago some of the politicians are in jail.’ ”
http://nationalpost.com/posted-toro...-torontos-largest-studios-could-hurt-industry

There'll be some juicy stories bringing this up-to-date in the next few days...On the Waterfront/The Sequel

Edit to Add:
From this UT site,
yyzer, Jul 13, 2007
Pinewood Toronto Studios (formerly FilmPort, formerly Alsop) | Page 8
(Originally from the Torontoist)
[...]
How the Filmport development arrived at the land deal was subject to criticism, particularly by competing studio Cinespace. The portlands are owned by the Toronto Economic Development Corporation (TEDCO), who granted the Filmport developers a 99-year lease which included a "no compete" clause—effectively locking out any competing studio from using the TEDCO lands. The TEDCO deals were also done entirely in secret, which miffed both Cinespace and citizens concerned about the waterfront plans, but also confirmed the suspicions of some that TEDCO—like the Toronto Port Authority—was an arms-length rogue agency.

The land was allocated after a 2004 bidding war, which saw England's famous Pinewood Studios losing-out to a bid by The Rose Corporation, which operates Toronto Film Studios (TFS), and a company held by TFS President Ken Ferguson. Toronto Film Studios is currently handling the second Incredible Hulk movie, which will be the most expensive film ever shot in Toronto.

Pinewood, which is part owned by director brothers Tony and Sir Ridley Scott, now has development plans for a five-studio complex in the west end. Once TFS relocates to Filmport, their existing Eastern Avenue site is slated for a Wal-Mart superstore.

Sadly, the big loser has been Cinespace, who were just booted out of their landmark Jarvis and Queens Quay facility by TEDCO to make way for office and retail space (also part of the Waterfront Revitalization Project). The 13,000 square metre (140,000 square foot) Cinespace Marine 28 waterfront complex was home to the production of more than 500 flicks, including X-Men and Chicago. TEDCO says that Cinespace knew for more than a year that they would have to close up shop, and that they offered studio land in Etobicoke that was rebuffed. [...]
http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/thread...s-formerly-filmport-formerly-alsop.633/page-8

"99 year lease". Fascinating...

Addendum:

Very good reading with an excellent posting to it by Alfredo Romano:
LORINC: What we talk about when we talk about mixed use on the waterfront
http://spacing.ca/toronto/2017/10/12/lorinc-talk-talk-mixed-use/
 
Last edited:
Good article by Lorinc, thanks for that. A nice little smack-down of Hume and his glossy assumptions about "mixed use" in Toronto. The Portlands should be a fascinating and dynamic mix of varied things - industry, office, residential, commercial, tourist-oriented. All of that can fit into this humongous chunk of land adjacent to the city core.

Still. Too much of what's going on (or, rather, stewing quietly) in the Portlands is shrouded in secrecy, laced in a thicket of sweetheart arrangements defined by one-sided economic terms and perverted by competitive politics. Business as usual I suppose but it's very frustrating to get to the bottom of it. Layers and layers of deceit and finger-pointing. The various players have to be equally coated in slime by now.
 
Good article by Lorinc, thanks for that. A nice little smack-down of Hume and his glossy assumptions about "mixed use" in Toronto. The Portlands should be a fascinating and dynamic mix of varied things - industry, office, residential, commercial, tourist-oriented. All of that can fit into this humongous chunk of land adjacent to the city core.

Still. Too much of what's going on (or, rather, stewing quietly) in the Portlands is shrouded in secrecy, laced in a thicket of sweetheart arrangements defined by one-sided economic terms and perverted by competitive politics. Business as usual I suppose but it's very frustrating to get to the bottom of it. Layers and layers of deceit and finger-pointing. The various players have to be equally coated in slime by now.
It is very difficult to get a clear picture of intent and cohesive direction on this, and I'm led to believe there's going to be more in-depth articles in the major press on it.

Even though I've questioned the methods and motives behind Pinewood in my recent comments, I've very impressed that Romano posted to clarify his position, contrary to what many might think:

[...] At Pinewood Toronto Studios we build the non descript film studio facilities that you’ve described and we believe much much more is possible and very likely with the current OP fashioned by Paul Bedford a decade ago, a truly visionary document that will be irreparably mitigated by this new, and yes, ‘shortsighted’ document. I agree with your vision for mixed uses living side by side with the less attractive (to some) businesses that will find a home in the Port, but as full participants in the exercise, Pinewood Toronto agrees with Hume, the proposed document is a significant step backward in the City Building exercise on the Waterfront. As Trojan horses go, it is cleverly clothed in the rhetoric of ‘protection’, when in fact it is a ringing endorsement of ‘status quo’. And more applications in the future for conversion to mixed use from Employment Lands that will never see the light of day. Not the way to build a waterfront for everyone. ]

This has been an issue/debate in many other areas of Toronto ex-industrial land, and is the case right now in West Liberty Village. The City is being rigid on zoning, and it puts a real damper on re-purposing a lot of otherwise stunning buildings, many of which are Heritage or Heritage Listed.

There was reference in the City's description of Pinewood's present site plans as wanting multi-use, including residential. That was not by accident.

The City, btw, has had a new zoning category on the books for some time now, and one wonders why? They seem unwilling or able to use it, unlike other US cities like New York, and now Vancouver:

http://www.toronto.ca/zoning/bylaw_amendments/ZBL_NewProvision_Chapter50.htm
http://www.toronto.ca/zoning/bylaw_amendments/ZBL_NewProvision_Chapter50_10.htm

New York devotes an entire chapter to it here: (pdf pg 35)
http://167.153.240.175/downloads/pdf/NYEO.pdf

Articles on Vancouver:
Industrial grit meets residential glass in Vancouver - The ...
www.theglobeandmail.com › ... › Industry News › Property Report
Jan 19, 2015 - Vancouver project combines industrial and residential space in a single building ... It's less noxious than when zoning laws were first put in place.” ... a new report it commissioned on how to revitalize its industrial sector. One of the recommendations: a new mixed commercial-residential-industrial district.
You've visited this page many times. Last visit: 05/10/15
[PDF]Vancouver - Avison Young
www.avisonyoung.com/fileDownloader.php?.../Vancouver/.../Vancouve...
Jan 30, 2015 - Industrial Report ... Amendments to industrial zoning regulations altering market activity. #. #. # .... MC-1 zoning “reinforces the mixed-use nature of this area, with residential, commercial and light industrial uses permitted.
Office zoning in Vancouver industrial areas spurs ... - RENX
renx.ca/office-zoning-in-vancouver-industrial-areas-spurs-real-estate-bo...
Mar 18, 2015 - Office zoning amendments to Vancouver's Mount Pleasant indusrial area ... year as fewer, bigger deals were made, a report from Avison Young found. ... to allow developers to construct a new mixed-use building an industrial area as .... 2015 Canadian commercial and residential real estate news at RENX.
 
Last edited:
Good article by Lorinc, thanks for that. A nice little smack-down of Hume and his glossy assumptions about "mixed use" in Toronto. The Portlands should be a fascinating and dynamic mix of varied things - industry, office, residential, commercial, tourist-oriented. All of that can fit into this humongous chunk of land adjacent to the city core.

Still. Too much of what's going on (or, rather, stewing quietly) in the Portlands is shrouded in secrecy, laced in a thicket of sweetheart arrangements defined by one-sided economic terms and perverted by competitive politics. Business as usual I suppose but it's very frustrating to get to the bottom of it. Layers and layers of deceit and finger-pointing. The various players have to be equally coated in slime by now.

The thing is the proposed plans actually allowed for it - PIC Core where residential is not allowed, period and PIC mixed used where it is open to residential usage. Just so happens that the Pinewood and Castlepoint lands are in the former category, hence the angst over the matter. In any case, in the case of Pinewood the lands are leased by TPLC for mainly film related uses - not residential first.

One should really read what the Portlands Framework has to say about it:

PIC Mixed use:

upload_2017-10-13_9-1-15.png


upload_2017-10-13_9-1-23.png


upload_2017-10-13_9-1-35.png


upload_2017-10-13_9-2-2.png


PIC Core:

upload_2017-10-13_9-2-17.png


upload_2017-10-13_9-2-27.png


upload_2017-10-13_9-2-32.png


upload_2017-10-13_9-2-37.png


http://www.waterfrontoronto.ca/nbe/...&CACHEID=97811a5f-e98b-4216-a84c-df454f876065

And note, PIC Mixed Use is going to be zoned Commercial Residential Employment - and specific reference to film uses in the plan (p. 108) relative to the overall Port Lands:

upload_2017-10-13_9-7-23.png


So if Pinewood want to get a 35 year lease for film related uses, fine by me - they will still have abide by the zoning. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Now if it is up to me, I would allow for a strip of PIC mixed use right by the shipping channel and right along Logan - but that's more a slight fudge of the overall direction.

AoD
 

Attachments

  • upload_2017-10-13_9-1-15.png
    upload_2017-10-13_9-1-15.png
    83.7 KB · Views: 464
  • upload_2017-10-13_9-1-23.png
    upload_2017-10-13_9-1-23.png
    80.1 KB · Views: 439
  • upload_2017-10-13_9-1-35.png
    upload_2017-10-13_9-1-35.png
    80.9 KB · Views: 441
  • upload_2017-10-13_9-2-2.png
    upload_2017-10-13_9-2-2.png
    77.3 KB · Views: 422
  • upload_2017-10-13_9-2-17.png
    upload_2017-10-13_9-2-17.png
    86.5 KB · Views: 437
  • upload_2017-10-13_9-2-27.png
    upload_2017-10-13_9-2-27.png
    79.5 KB · Views: 430
  • upload_2017-10-13_9-2-32.png
    upload_2017-10-13_9-2-32.png
    73.7 KB · Views: 450
  • upload_2017-10-13_9-2-37.png
    upload_2017-10-13_9-2-37.png
    65.8 KB · Views: 446
  • upload_2017-10-13_9-7-23.png
    upload_2017-10-13_9-7-23.png
    112.3 KB · Views: 453
Last edited:
One should really read what the Portlands Framework has to say about it:
It's the City that determines the zoning, (with the Province signing off to make it official) and they bristle at Pinewood's inclusion of "residential" in their future site-plans.

upload_2017-10-14_11-3-6.png


upload_2017-10-14_11-1-56.png

http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2017/pg/bgrd/backgroundfile-103949.pdf

Here's Pinewood's (as presented by Alfredo Romano) public presentation on proposed future use:

Alfredo Romano
Director, Pinewood Toronto Studios

Pinewood Toronto Studios will catalyze investment by transforming an area of Toronto’s eastern waterfront into a cultural hub for film, TV and digital media.
The multimedia studio will feature almost 400,000 square feet of modern, purpose-built production facilities for film and television. The site is located in the Port Lands, an area the city has targeted for revitalization.

HOK created an “Evolution Plan,” a short- and long-term blueprint for developing this 33 acres of land within the 140-acre Film Studio District. The plan is based on four pillars of sustainability: social (transit-supportive live/work neighborhood), cultural (mixed media/creative-based), environmental (integrated conservation approach) and economic (post-industrial employment hub on a brownfield site).

Carefully blended mid-rise, point tower and innovative live/film building formats expertly wrap the secured film and television studios. The design enhances the public realm by celebrating the site’s waterfront location and introducing “film shooting streets” as well as a network of plazas and open spaces.

The plan includes upgrades and improvements to film and TV studios, flexible spaces for media and innovation, and complementary uses such as culture, retail, hotel and residential.

SIZE
33 acres / 13.6 hectares

SERVICES
Master Planning
Urban Design


http://www.hok.com/design/region/canada/pinewood-toronto-studios-plan/

I'm still digging on details surrounding that, but let's return to the map (Fig 37) that Alvin posts. You'll note the emphasis on "A Film Friendly Future".

We're up against the "sleight of hand" yet again. I'd protested some six or so months back that (gist) "This looks like a heyday for developers at the expense of the taxpayer" as the plans at that time showed high-rise condos well beyond the presently shown 'Lower Don Lands'. Alvin replied sharply (gist) "There'll be affordable housing too".

The claims for the re-purposing of the Port Lands appears to depend on what slant vested interests need at the time. "The Dream" appears to be very malleable. No wonder the Public is getting confused on this. Even those promoting it keep changing 'the vision'.

I'm not against developers, at all, just unbridled walls of condos that will sprout, as we've seen time and again on the waterfront and elsewhere in Toronto. And yet those promoting developers who are proposing that are so ready to aim vitriol at developers who 'aren't playing by the rules' of what's being envisioned by WT. And the Hearn epitomizes that reaction.

I've been doing some background searching on all involved in the present Hearn broo-ha. And Cartellucci seems to be ahead of Waterfront Toronto's vision in many respects, including actual results:

[...][Cortellucci’s focus on sustainable development has been good for business, earning him favour among decision makers. “Any time the Cortel Group brings forward a project, the political body has such respect for (Mario’s) abilities,” says Geddes. (Terry Geddes, the former mayor of Collingwood)

“Because he doesn’t just look at development in terms of today, but 50 to 100 years from now, and whether it’s still going to be able to exist.”

That’s how the Cortel Group has planned Expo City. After all, as Peter Cortellucci notes, creating a complete community in Vaughan is the key to ensuring a healthy future for the city.

“We envision an area where you don’t need a car, which sounds far-fetched right now,” he says. “Highway 7 doesn’t function as a highway anymore, it’s so over capacity that you won’t ever be able to improve it.

“The only way you improve it is by promoting walking and transit like Viva and the subway.”

Could other cities in the GTA follow Vaughan’s lead and take similar steps to create sustainable communities?

It all depends on political leadership — and vision, Mario Cortellucci says.

“You need the politicians to make it happen. The bottom line is that politicians tend to look at what’s in their interests, not what’s in the future interests of the people. And that’s where the conflict comes in.” ]
https://www.thestar.com/life/homes/...llucci_builds_with_a_focus_on_the_future.html

I'm inclined to agree...and yet some find the Hearn situation "shocking". Will "Mister C" and partners proceed in this direction with the Hearn? Remains to be seen. There's going to be a lot to discuss and read in the very near future on this. And much of it won't conform to blithely accepting "The Dream" as espoused by WT.

Addendum: Doing some background checking on Terry Geddes, to see if he has a 'slant of his own' behind his comment on Cartellucci. Indeed, he does:
[...]
Terry Geddes, the Mayor of Collingwood, said that although the development has huge economic spinoffs for the whole region, something needs to be done to provide affordable housing for staff at the resort.

"I am working with all levels of government to try to get financial subsidies for that," Mr. Geddes said in an interview. "We certainly hope Intrawest will help back up our case."

Intrawest, one of the biggest players in North America's resort-based real estate game, owns 10 ski resorts in Canada and the United States, and pioneered the "village" concept, in which people buy their units outright instead of just getting time-shares, and use the property for weekend and holiday retreats for their families.[...]
https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/re...18440076/?ref=http://www.theglobeandmail.com&
[...]
During his term as county warden, Geddes has led the county into examining the issue of growth and land use, as part of the IGAP (intergovernmental action plan) on growth. He urged Barrie, Orillia and the county to work together to create a made-in-Simcoe solution.

“IGAP will demand everybody keep an open mind and we have to remember it is the citizens who must be the benefactors of our decisions,” he said.

“It’s not going to be an easy process and there will be frustrations. But if we start out on a common ground that calls for facilitation, there’s not too much we can’t achieve.”

Geddes said he has already had discussions about future opportunities, and he did say he has been known for his facilitation skills, especially during his times as a (high school) principal and town mayor.

“I’ve tried to be fair as a principal and as a mayor. One always has to have respect for the decisions of the majority,” he said.[...]
https://www.simcoe.com/news-story/2033078-terry-geddes-packs-it-in/
 

Attachments

  • upload_2017-10-14_11-1-56.png
    upload_2017-10-14_11-1-56.png
    100.6 KB · Views: 445
  • upload_2017-10-14_11-3-6.png
    upload_2017-10-14_11-3-6.png
    27.5 KB · Views: 420
Last edited:

Back
Top