Should the Toronto Islands be kept as-is?

[Junction416]

All new ideas are old. A neighbourhood on the island is an old idea. It was very seriously discussed in the 1970s and called harbour city. Unbuilt Toronto: A History of the City That Might Have Been by Mark Osbaldeston has a whole chapter on it. Some screen shots attached below of the imagined communities. Both images are from the book, pg 58 and 59.

 

[Archivist]

Harbour City was largely on infill and where the TT Airport is; though the islands were to be altered they were mostly left envisaged as parkland. Kind of an interesting idea, though. Can you imagine if this had been built? Most of the people posting here would be talking about the "crappy seventies stuff" that needs to be swept clean and started from scratch. And to some extent, depending on how it was developed, they might be right! The monorail would have broken down around 1983 and not been replaced, though the rusting guideway would have been left intact. Although there weren't a lot of tall buildings proposed, I could see the ground levels having been something like Crescent-Town-by-the-water. Architects of the ere were fond of the pedestrian over-and-under pass.

Anyways, I think the posters who have commented that we have no shortage of waterfront development in our near future are also making an astute point. If nothing else, I would think we would leave the islands as they are until, say, the Portlands vision has played out, and see from there.

 

[Fad225]

I defiantly think a portion of the Islands should be built on and integrated into the city. There is potential here for new typologies of built-form and urbanity different than any where else in North America. I think they are a missed opportunity as they stand today.. they are currently an annual weekend get-away for most Torontonians - abandoned for the rest of the year. yet they are a gem that needs very careful balance between sensitive ecological planning, open space provisions, and cultural/social space for the city inhabitants. I'd much rather city a small-scale urban village than Centreville amusement park be the crown of these islands.

 

[Archivist]

they are currently an annual weekend get-away for most Torontonians - I dispute this. I think for new Canadians they are used heavily and frequently, as a substitute for a trip out of town. The ferries are always chock a block on nice days.

PS - did you meant you "defiantly think" so, or "definitely think" so? I don't think defiance is needed, it's a pretty polite discussion so far.

 

[sunnyvale]

http://www.torontoisland.org/
Generations of families fought the destruction of most of the original Island community, and have promoted the expansion of what's left. Although any serious city planning for future growth might want to think twice about paving its parks, the current lease agreement with the city and the trust which manages the sale of leases limits housing opportunities to existing single family detached homes, a few seniors bed spaces and temporary live-in studios for resident artists. Descendants of existing lease holders are eventually forced to leave the community because of a lack of housing alternatives and no legal mechanism save inheritance for transferring title. Some islanders are looking for new development to fill the gaps in the community, including market rate and subsidized rental accommodations.

 

[waterloowarrior]

I'd love to see a Dutch firm plan for a redevelopment of this area... they have many new communities with a good balance of housing types, modern design, sustainable transportation, green space/recreation, and obviously incorporating water well into the design. This could be done on the airport lands and/or filling in part of the harbour. The existing cottages on the island could be redeveloped into small scale apartments (perhaps similar in scale to the apartments/chalets seen in smaller Swiss towns), keeping the rural kind of feel while at the same time increasing the density

 

[PinkLucy]

they are currently an annual weekend get-away for most Torontonians - I dispute this. I think for new Canadians they are used heavily and frequently, as a substitute for a trip out of town. The ferries are always chock a block on nice days.

Agreed. I haven't been to the islands since I can't remember when. I keep meaning to go ...

 

[adma]

Harbour City was largely on infill and where the TT Airport is; though the islands were to be altered they were mostly left envisaged as parkland. Kind of an interesting idea, though. Can you imagine if this had been built? Most of the people posting here would be talking about the "crappy seventies stuff" that needs to be swept clean and started from scratch. And to some extent, depending on how it was developed, they might be right!

If you mean like the way people knock the St Lawrence Neighbourhood, I see what you mean. Though I can envisage something more along the lines of the the S side of False Creek...and I don't know how much of a "crappy seventies stuff" stigma that holds today...

 

[junctionist]

Harbour City was largely on infill and where the TT Airport is; though the islands were to be altered they were mostly left envisaged as parkland. Kind of an interesting idea, though. Can you imagine if this had been built? Most of the people posting here would be talking about the "crappy seventies stuff" that needs to be swept clean and started from scratch. And to some extent, depending on how it was developed, they might be right! The monorail would have broken down around 1983 and not been replaced, though the rusting guideway would have been left intact. Although there weren't a lot of tall buildings proposed, I could see the ground levels having been something like Crescent-Town-by-the-water. Architects of the ere were fond of the pedestrian over-and-under pass.

Remember though that Jane Jacobs was supposed to have been involved in figuring out the pedestrian realm for Harbour City. That part of it was in good hands. Harbour City would have been in a prominent area accessible to tourists, and likely not neglected. I think the community would have been admired to this day for its forward thinking design.

We also wouldn't have the island airport, which could have stimulated more such projects. You're correct in pointing out the need to focus on the Port Lands at this point. But the island airport did disappear, it would be an opportunity to develop a sort of Amsterdam-inspired area.

 

[Archivist]

junctionist, I think I could agree with that. If the TT Airport goes some day (which seems increasingly unlikely - from headlines today it seems more likely that we will end up with a big waterfront parking garage instead!) I don't think would be in a position to convert it to parkland easily - more likely they would allow part of it to be developed and use development funds to improve access to the island, landscape, or building some sensitive attractions. I would not be opposed to such an effort.

Maybe Harbour City would have been fun. My earlier comment was more along the lines of, whatever they built there at the time (and if they do, in the future), it would probably attract a certain level of derision now regardless of perceived success or failure by some. Just as if those who would see the islands built up entirely had their way, I could easily see that becoming a "we lost the islands for this?" kind of exercise.

 

[adma]

Just as if those who would see the islands built up entirely had their way, I could easily see that becoming a "we lost the islands for this?" kind of exercise.

Particularly if it became the subject of a "before and after" photo thread...

 

[unimaginative2]

a) You should check out the Harbour City plan.
b) High density doesn't require tall buildings.
c) The island attracts far more people than boating enthusiasts. It's packed with people on a summer day.
d) The best thing that could be done for the island is to reduce the fare on the ferry. If the Staten Island ferry can be free, why not the Toronto Island ferry? At the very least it should be the same as a TTC fare, with transfers accepted.

 

[buschic]

Most of my friends and I go there all the time in the late spring, summer and early fall, many people I know head there to just get out of the crazyness that is Toronto.. no buses, no cars, no noisy Suv's no careless car drivers, no taxi's, I love it there, so my simple answer to your thought, is NO, do not build condos there, let the Island stay as the little oasis away from the big city, for those of us that fully rely on TTC or public Transit, to get around, that cant or dont want to drive, its our way of 'getting back to the country' and away from the city.

 

[buschic]

I agree with everything you said, other than b)

 

[Parkdalian]

Building on the park is dumb, but we need better access to it. The islands are Toronto's only equivalent to the large open air parks of New York, Chicago, London, Paris, etc, but it is very difficult to get large numbers of people in and out of the park. So, whenever a large concert or festival thinks of coming to Toronto, it either has to go to a) whatever Molson Park is now called (too far away) b) Downsview Park (weirdly inaccessible) or c) cram into some relatively tiny open-air equivalent, like Molson Amphitheatre. Olympic Island is near perfect for these festivals, but leaving Olympic Island at night with thousands of other people is like trying to escape Europe ahead of the Nazis: endless lines of people waiting for some chug-chug boat to slowly coast them away.

Maybe we could think of having some pedestrian bridge that is only open for concerts, festivals and fireworks, and the rest of the time we can enjoy the charming slowness of the ferries.