Toronto Corktown Common | ?m | ?s | Waterfront Toronto | Maryann Thompson

[Tulse]

Isn't the park suppose to flood ? : - )

It's built on the flood protection landform, so the "wet" side near the Don is supposed to stop flood waters from getting past it. Given its design, I'd be surprised if anything very "fancy" in the park was under water, as most of the developed parts of the park are on the higher ground.

That said, I'd be really interested in seeing photos of what it looks like now...

 

[taal]

It's built on the flood protection landform, so the "wet" side near the Don is supposed to stop flood waters from getting past it. Given its design, I'd be surprised if anything very "fancy" in the park was under water, as most of the developed parts of the park are on the higher ground.

That said, I'd be really interested in seeing photos of what it looks like now...

Well do keep in mind the amount of rain was unprecedented ... well ... having said that it was so localized, I'm not sure how the rain was on the east side, the few folks in the beach I know didn't have any issues (an area typically prone to flooding).

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Well, the new FPL/park came in handy - it is supposed to not only protect the new developments from flooding but the entire zone including St. Lawrence.

AoD

 

[Silence&Motion]

I can't say I'm a huge fan of the No Shoes sculpture (or the entire Abstract Expressionist movement for that matter - another bad memory from American Cold War hysteria, like McCarthyism).

However, I did come across these photos of No Shoes being installed in High Park back in 1967.

 

[taal]

I agree I don't like it either, and the few folks who saw the park with me agreed or found it strange ... I want to like it ...

 

[interchange42]

It's definitely strange, no doubt about that. We're not meant to necessarily relate to such items immediately. They're meant to challenge one's perception, and it's the viewers prerogative to react in whatever way — with hostility, with curiosity, with openness, etc. etc. etc.

42

 

[taal]

It's definitely strange, no doubt about that. We're not meant to necessarily relate to such items immediately. They're meant to challenge one's perception, and it's the viewers prerogative to react in whatever way — with hostility, with curiosity, with openness, etc. etc. etc.

42

I get that but honestly we have a lot of similar pieces, at least I'll argue as much, I'm thinking of cityplace for one. Interestingly enough for the lack of public realm in Toronto we have quite the thing for abstract pieces of art.

 

[interchange42]

In fact, Flower Power at CityPlace is the sister piece of No Shoes. Both are by Mark di Suvero, and both resided in the forest on the east side of High Park for a few decades before being refurbished and moved to their present more prominent locations. There are currently eight di Suveros on display for a year in Crissy Field overlooking the Golden Gate Bridge, and yes di Suvero is controversial in San Francisco too.

42

 

[MafaldaBoy]

Took a bit of a walk around yesterday (July 12, 2013); lots of people and a considerable number of children:

A large swarm of dragonflies(?) attacked me as I left:

 

[junctionist]

Too bad about the asphalt pathways throughout the park. They look cheap.

 

[RiverCity1]

Some of us runners prefer asphalt as it's 10 times softer than concrete and moderately easier on joints. I also prefer to ride and inline skate on asphalt. I guess we all see things very differently.

 

[adHominem]

Great photo update, Mafaldaboy, thank you. Although I do like how you mentioned that there were tons of people, followed by a dozen photos of no people! You must have spent quite some time framing those shots.

Some of us runners prefer asphalt...

Agreed 100%. The footing's also much more predictable on good asphalt as opposed to interlocking brick or stone.

 

[MafaldaBoy]

Great photo update, Mafaldaboy, thank you. Although I do like how you mentioned that there were tons of people, followed by a dozen photos of no people! You must have spent quite some time framing those shots.

Agreed 100%. The footing's also much more predictable on good asphalt as opposed to interlocking brick or stone.

Thanks for the kind words. To be fair, the large majority of the the people there were part of one group; some sort of tour (or a large family congregation; lots of kids) They arrived the same time I did so I jumped ahead and snapped pictures where I didn't get in their way.

 

[junctionist]

Nice photos. Those metal rails running along the edges of the vegetation and alongside the bridge look utterly cheap and utilitarian. It would have looked better if they went with the glossy finish, a la the staircases. I also think it's a bit unnecessary to have the rails adjacent to the vegetation. Who would walk in there? Other than that, the park looks really nice.

The railing is another thing I noticed with the asphalt path issue. Asphalt is good for jogging, but there had to be something they could have done to make it look better like framing it with some bricks along the sides. They could also have done a main asphalt path for jogging, along with some brick or stone side paths.

 

[old boy]

As good as the pictures are, they don't do full justice to the place. I visited the park for the first time today and given what this place has so recently and magnificently replaced, I'd say the complaints about metal railings and asphalt sound a little grumpy. The city can take a long bow on this one, and it's going to get better as the entire site matures in the next couple of years.