[AlvinofDiaspar]

I was down at Sherbourne Common last night and see that they are making a movie. Great, employment and all that!

However, to allow them to have a stunt where a car 'flies' into the lake from the foot of Lower Sherbourne they have cut down two (or 3) of the wonderful trees on the Waterfront Promenade. I assume they will be replanted (one day) but it is REALLY wrong to cut down mature and health trees for movie making. Even if replanted, the new trees will be smaller than others in the row and continue to look strange for several more years. I was told that Pam only found out about this by chance and managed to reduce the cutting from 4 to 2 and that things like this are decided by City Staff not by Council.

Pretty damned stupid in my opinion!

That is ridiculous and infuriating - who authorized it and on what basis? Do you have any names? Perhaps it can be FOI-ed.

AoD

 

[PinkLucy]

I was down at Sherbourne Common last night and see that they are making a movie. Great, employment and all that!

However, to allow them to have a stunt where a car 'flies' into the lake from the foot of Lower Sherbourne they have cut down two (or 3) of the wonderful trees on the Waterfront Promenade. I assume they will be replanted (one day) but it is REALLY wrong to cut down mature and health trees for movie making. Even if replanted, the new trees will be smaller than others in the row and continue to look strange for several more years. I was told that Pam only found out about this by chance and managed to reduce the cutting from 4 to 2 and that things like this are decided by City Staff not by Council.

Pretty damned stupid in my opinion!

+1

 

[junior43]

That is ridiculous and infuriating - who authorized it and on what basis? Do you have any names? Perhaps it can be FOI-ed.

AoD

It's also nothing new. They did something similar at bluffers park. They strung ropes on the top and even a mattress hung over the side. They then repeatedly had people jumping off, tearing up the cliff edge (accelerating the erosion). Also, they filmed from the bottom and removed several 6x6 posts along the path so they could film - and of course, they never put them back.

Didn't they also cut down street trees near city hall a few years ago for a movie as well?

 

[DSCToronto]

That is ridiculous and infuriating - who authorized it and on what basis? Do you have any names? Perhaps it can be FOI-ed. AoD

According to Pam's Office it was approved by Zaib Shaikh, the city's new Film Commissioner and Director of Entertainment Industries and the Parks Department. I do not have Shaikh's email but his office is at filmtoronto@toronto.ca Richard Ubbens the Director of Parks is at rubbens@toronto.ca

I have emailed both to express my disgust and copied Pam McConnell at councillor_mcconnell@toronto.ca

Others may want to do so too?

 

[Filip]

That is ridiculous and infuriating - who authorized it and on what basis? Do you have any names? Perhaps it can be FOI-ed.

AoD

That is absolutely ridiculous, agreed.

Unless they can replant the exact same type of tree at the right size, then the whole promenade will look silly.. And for what? A movie? Come on.

 

[Roundabout]

When down to the waterfront today.
Car ramp (and missing trees)

And construction updates:

 

[DSCToronto]

I just had a reply from Zaib Shaikh the Film Commissioner, among other things he says that the tree removal was approved by Forestry and Parks, not the Film Unit and adds:

"The production has assured the city, in writing (and with detailed plans of how, when, who and where) that the replacement trees will be of similar size to the ones that were cut and that the promenade will be returned to its original look. By the week of August 8 you should see the restoration complete."

It will be interesting to see how they plant mature trees and whether any planted in the summer heat will survive. Bets, anyone?

If (or when) I get a reply from Richard Ubbens I will post it but still encourage UTers to write to the City - they need to know that people care!

 

[Register123]

I just had a reply from Zaib Shaikh the Film Commissioner, among other things he says that the tree removal was approved by Forestry and Parks, not the Film Unit and adds:

"The production has assured the city, in writing (and with detailed plans of how, when, who and where) that the replacement trees will be of similar size to the ones that were cut and that the promenade will be returned to its original look. By the week of August 8 you should see the restoration complete."

It will be interesting to see how they plant mature trees and whether any planted in the summer heat will survive. Bets, anyone?

If (or when) I get a reply from Richard Ubbens I will post it but still encourage UTers to write to the City - they need to know that people care!

If these trees are planted in the next ef weeks , forget it they won't last a year. Hope they get some sort of warranty from the movie studio.

 

[AndreaPalladio]

I got the same response, with the addition that Mr. Shaikh isn't responsible because he wasn't on the job then. No response from Pam McConnell, but she doesn't respond to constituents, so that's not unexpected.

 

[argus]

Awesome. So once again someone doesn't know who decided what, and it isn't known for sure.

Film commissioners making decisions about the tree canopy. Maybe. Or maybe not.

 

[AndreaPalladio]

He told me that Parks and McConnell approved it.

 

[ksun]

Even if you look at Chicago's fiscal problems, I doubt you'd find a lot of people who consider their waterfront investment a poor one.

+1, chicago's expensive waterfront is simply grand and spectacular for both locals to enjoy and tourists from all around the world to marvel at. Toronto's waterfront is more of a neighbourhood park for families to kill some time on summer weekends. There is no beauty there. Yes, it is cheaper but it really does little (if not hurt) for the image of the city.

Speaking of quality, I don't really see much really high quality element here. People love sugar beach and sherbourne commons, I am glad they happened too but for the city of Toronto, I will play the devil's advocate and say it is simply not enough. We are still thinking too small and our central waterfront from Sherbourne to Spadina simply isn't attractive. We are simply not ambitious. We have only one waterfront by downtown and it should wow people from New York, Chicago, Shanghai, Paris and Dubai. Does ours do that? No, people end up be underwhelmed, does it work, of course. I am sure families coming from the suburbs will enjoy it, but it is not something international travellers will talk about after visiting Toronto.

Even after the whole waterfront project is done, it will still not be a beautiful place (lively? yes). Tacky condos and cheap recreation stages are still there. There will still be no unique and magnificent features that will be photogenic and take your breath away. I am sure it will look a lot better but just not something one expects from a city like Toronto.

But Toronto seems to OK with something that "works well", so what I personally think really doesn't matter.

 

[lead82]

+1, chicago's expensive waterfront is simply grand and spectacular for both locals to enjoy and tourists from all around the world to marvel at. Toronto's waterfront is more of a neighbourhood park for families to kill some time on summer weekends. There is no beauty there. Yes, it is cheaper but it really does little (if not hurt) for the image of the city.

Speaking of quality, I don't really see much really high quality element here. People love sugar beach and sherbourne commons, I am glad they happened too but for the city of Toronto, I will play the devil's advocate and say it is simply not enough. We are still thinking too small and our central waterfront from Sherbourne to Spadina simply isn't attractive. We are simply not ambitious. We have only one waterfront by downtown and it should wow people from New York, Chicago, Shanghai, Paris and Dubai. Does ours do that? No, people end up be underwhelmed, does it work, of course. I am sure families coming from the suburbs will enjoy it, but it is not something international travellers will talk about after visiting Toronto.

Even after the whole waterfront project is done, it will still not be a beautiful place (lively? yes). Tacky condos and cheap recreation stages are still there. There will still be no unique and magnificent features that will be photogenic and take your breath away. I am sure it will look a lot better but just not something one expects from a city like Toronto.

But Toronto seems to OK with something that "works well", so what I personally think really doesn't matter.

I agree, that our Waterfront will never look as stunning as other major world cities, but you must remember that Toronto is a World City wannabe. Toronto citizenry and it's politicians are timid and have a small town mentality. It prevails across Canada. Toronto's current mayor is the epitome of cheapness. If it was up to him we wouldn't be 'wasting' any money on any waterfront improvements. The work that has been currently been done will be the best public space that Toronto has. Compare the quality of Queen's Quay, Sugar Beach to the Bloor Street transformation. These are all small slivers of public space, but at least the new waterfront areas are going to be connected and will have a waterfront promenade with mature trees.

Toronto can never get Chicago's waterfront, but frankly I wouldn't want it. Chicago's is great for tourists who travel there, but in my view, outside of Millennium park, the waterfront is fairly bland and tacky also. Sure it's got great museums, but it's meant for tourists not locals. Plus, there is not much to do in Chicago's waterfront area except to stroll around. There aren't any restaurants outside of Navy Pier.

Toronto needs to define it's own identity. We will have a dense waterfront and the new East Bayfront neighbourhood I am hoping will define us. If it is built well, we may have a fantastic waterfront street lined with patios and restaurants. Our waterfront will be busy, happening, and it will become a local destination. Toronto was never destined to be a tourist town, but our waterfront will be just that, it will be for Torontonians to use and enjoy. I hope that the improvements continue after the current set of projects, since Waterfront Toronto is due to run out of money in 2017 and will need a progressive mayor and council to let it borrow money against future construction so it can continue it's great work to date.

I'm excited to see the East Bayfront completed and Queen's Quay boulevard remade. If the same change gets applied to Queens Quay East, we will have a beautiful main waterfront street compared to the ugliness that it was before the transformation.

 

[interchange42]

First: It's very difficult to replant trees during mid-summer and keep them alive. It's especially difficult to keep them alive when they are larger as the root system gets very complex as trees grow from year to year. Decisions like this are crazy-making, and we need to hold everyone responsible here accountable if the replacement trees don't live up to expectations.

Second: don't derail this thread with yet more of that overly simplistic Chicago-is-wonderful-we-suck-wah-wah-wah. Take it to another thread. Keep this on topic!

42

 

[Bad Bear]

First: It's very difficult to replant trees during mid-summer and keep them alive. It's especially difficult to keep them alive when they are larger as the root system gets very complex as trees grow from year to year. Decisions like this are crazy-making, and we need to hold everyone responsible here accountable if the replacement trees don't live up to expectations.

Second: don't derail this thread with yet more of that overly simplistic Chicago-is-wonderful-we-suck-wah-wah-wah, or Toronto-is-a-wannabe-World-Class-city-wah-wah-wah-more-world-class-bullsh*t-wah-wah. Take it to another thread. Keep this on topic!

42

Fixed. I'm honestly tired of hearing the same redundant non-sense about how Toronto-is-not-enough-World-Class-shame-oh-shame-this-city-sucks in almost EVERY thread. This thing it's beyond annoying. Enough!