Toronto Alexandra Park Revitalization | 53.48m | 15s | TCHC | SvN

I think the Dutch have it figured out with woonerfs and the Japanese with their sidewalkless neighbourhoods- eliminating the segregation between the pedestrian and vehicular realms helps slow down traffic, keeping streets within the realm of the pedestrian, while also allowing access into the block (avoiding the creation of neighbourhood "fortresses").

Bit of a shame that North American thinking still prioritizes homogenization of uses.

That being said, I think the ratio of road-pedestrian streets is sufficient in this case. The two east-west streets through the site should provide ample access and prevent blocks from getting too large.
Last edited:
Bit of a shame that North American thinking still prioritizes homogenization of uses.

I agree with that overall sentiment, but Planning/WT have made attempts at it here, which I suppose is noble, but my personal view is that they've failed to achieve what was intended because they've been wishy washy, middle-of-the-road (no pun intended) attempts at legit, Dutch-style woonerfs.

WT, believe it or not, considers Front St. through the West Donlands/Canary District to be a woonerf, which is of course laughable if you've ever even seen a picture of a woonerf. It's a bit of a "hey, look, we put cobblestone-esque pavers down and painted some sharrows, look at our woonerf" situation.

I hesitate to advocate for more woonerf-style streets (in this case and all others) until Planning/WT actually antes up to create something that looks less like this:


...and more like this:



  • upload_2017-9-27_11-33-20.png
    526.6 KB · Views: 775
Front isn't considered a Woonerf. It's just a cobble street.

I agree with you, but I've had WT reps assert to me that they consider it a woonerf (though, in fairness, the lines between "woonerf" and "complete street" may have been blurred in those conversations).

WT also took to their blog to respond to a Spacing article criticizing WT's classification of Trolley Crescent as a woonerf, which included this bit:

"The width of the woonerfs is wider than you might see in a traditional Dutch woonerf, as Dylan rightly points out. We would have liked them to be narrower, but underground utilities and emergency vehicle access prevented that. We had to use these lanes as rights-of-way for buried utilities (gas, hydro, etc.). These utilities stipulate in Ontario how much room they require between them and other street elements (street trees, etc.). We also had to allow for the minimum requirements for unobstructed access for emergency services. City ladder fire trucks are large and require space to extend their outriggers."
Last edited:
Ward 20 - Tor & E.York District

►View All Properties

This application is to update the Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-Law amendment, draft plan of subdivision and rental housing demolition and replacement applications that were approved in in 2012 (OPA 189) and 2013 (By-law 1710-2013), forming the Masterplan for the Alexandra Park and Atkinson Co-op Revitalization. Changes to the previously approved masterplan are as follows: - Proposed demolition and reconstruction of 73 Augusta Ave (Replacement of 77 residential units, day nursery and Co-op office) - Increase of approxamately 500 square metres of public parkland - Increase in number of market units from 1,125 to approxamately 1,397 - Changes to block pattern, building height and massing, townhouse typology, etc.

Proposed Use --- # of Storeys --- # of Units ---

Type Number Date Submitted Status
OPA & Rezoning 17 278596 STE 20 OZ Dec 22, 2017 Under Review

The proposed Master Plan retains the same number of Atkinson Housing Co-op social housing units as the approved plan. The number of units by bedroom type and the total number of RGI units is also unchanged between the approved and proposed plans. Additional updates to the Master Plan include (see Figure 5):
  • The conversion of all planned stacked townhouses to a mix of back-to-back and through units, as well as townhouses integrated into the base of mid-rise buildings. This is in response to community feedback to provide basements in back-to-back and through townhouses and more accessible units. The total number of replacement townhouses is not changing. More detail on townhouse replacement is provided in Section 3.8;
  • The demolition of 73-75 Augusta Square and replacement of the 77 apartment units it contains, rather than simply refurbishing the units, in response to strong support by the community. This results in no net change to the number of social housing units, but requires permission for an additional 5,500 square metres of TCH gross floor area (GFA) (see Table 1);
  • The incorporation of 20,200 square metres of additional residential market GFA to offset the additional cost of replacing 73-75 Augusta Square and ensure that the revitalization plan remains self-financing. This additional GFA is equal to approximately 300 additional market units. These units are located in the same number of market buildings, but the massing and height of these buildings has been updated to accommodate the additional GFA (see Table 1);

  • Allowance for live/work units along the edges of the Entry Green and a portion of Cameron Street, as well as small flexible retail units flanking the west edge of the public park;
  • The reconfiguration of the public parkland while maintaining at least the same size of park approved in the 2011 Master Plan;
  • Improvements to the scale and configuration of the POPS;
  • Addition of new facilities for the Co-op offices and the child care centre (currently located within 73-75 Augusta Square);
  • The relocation of the Community Recreation Hub so that it is adjacent to the park. The location of the two basketball courts is to be determined, based on community consultation and the design process for the Hub;
  • Improvements to overall site circulation;
  • Revised building massing and heights to incorporate additional TCH and market GFA; and

  • Updates to the relationship of taller elements at the north end of the site with Dundas Street to the north and Grange Avenue to the south.



  • upload_2018-1-4_23-41-6.png
    1.3 MB · Views: 770
I'm impatiently awaiting action along Dundas street. Multiple units have been boarded up for years with no sign of progress. It's such a blight.
agreed. That stretch of Dundas is so dead, especially considering its adjacency to Kensington. The additional density is also always appreciated, I've always found the densities in this to be disappointingly low.
Regent Park redevelopment made a horrible waste of Dundas Street in the east. Straight out of 60s. I do hope this one turns out better.

I also wish those social housing townhomes were mid-rise, increasing the housing stock.
Last edited:
The one thing that is really poor about Dundas through Regent park that I think makes it feel so dead is that on street parking isn't permitted - cars fly along Dundas with their 4 full lanes available. The lack of fine grained retail is also less than desirable.
The density provided and the distribution looks pretty damn good in the master plan. Building even more non market housing would mean building more market housing as well to cover the costs. It's just going to throw the density out of whack.
What exactly is your point?

Because developers aren't in it to barely break even and that makes them greedy? Take a good look in the mirror. Anyone with an investment portfolio is bound to have some in real estate investment (from which developers finance purchases and construction) and I doubt you would be satisfied with barely breaking even on your investment portfolio.
Some photo updates from site 11 and site 15, taken earlier today. The new street frontage looks great, and the bright yellow highlights stand out nicely against an otherwise grim atmosphere.



  • tane_-8814.JPG
    271.4 KB · Views: 728
  • tane_-8815.JPG
    225 KB · Views: 746
  • tane_-8817.JPG
    168.3 KB · Views: 722
  • tane_-8819.JPG
    267.8 KB · Views: 730
  • tane_-8821.JPG
    219.1 KB · Views: 779