Toronto Corus Quay | ?m | 8s | Waterfront Toronto | Diamond Schmitt

Probably something, in a broader sense ... but my point was that private initiatives seem to be the ones that are pushing the envelope in the city, raising the bar etc.
 
Tewder, you seem to be critical of the City and the Mayor on this project. According to The Star, the Mayor/City's role in this was encouraging the City to lend construction financing to TEDCO. TEDCO is developing this building with a private-sector user whose requirements help create the special type of animated and exciting uses at the water's edge. The public-sector aspect mandates that it be a LEED Gold "green building" and that the use is not yet another condo or a "dead" corporate use like a bank or call-center; instead we get a media company and 1,300 creative workers on the waterfront -- Toronto's waterfront.
 
Tewder sees to be reading too much Royson James lately. He's been on a roll of bashing Miller on this and other threads.

That said, this project, even though it is an improvement, is still a disappointment, and I don't like the overly favourable terms to the tenants of this space. You can't just blame Miller, but he has to do something about TEDCO.
 
^^What is wrong with someone having a problem with Miller? I know a lot of people who regret voting for him-especially considering his inconsistentcies when it comes to making decisions-he is never REALLY for or against anything- he is just Mr. Status Quo-play safe..But please, this is not a topic about Mayor Miller..so don't go lambasting me now.
-------------

No one is speaking about the fact that 1300 jobs will be leaving Liberty Village. That won't be so benificial to the area.

p5
 
Thank you P5connex, my sentiments exactly.

I don't have a personal problem with Miller or even his policies necessarily. My criticism of him here and in other posts here is specifically from the perspective of urban Toronto issues. It's hard not to appear to be bashing Miller when in each thread on each topic I can't help but be disappointed by his role or performance (again, from the standpoint of Urban Toronto issues). But I have no axe to grind, truly, and am willing and wanting to shower heaps of praise on him and give credit where credit is due. So, that said, maybe it is important to have a discussion here, or debate, of what his achievements have been?

Some topics for consideration:

The Waterfront, and Corus/Project Symphony.
The Cultural Renaissance.
His City Clean & Beautiful initiative
Improvements and expansion of mass transit in the city, and from the city to the burbs.
 
There is a thread in Toronto Issues which talks about Miller. Maybe this is a better spot for such a discussion.
 
Housekeeping move makes for lakefront `milestone'

Jun 26, 2007 04:30 AM
Christopher Hume

Simple is good, but on Toronto's waterfront, things are anything but.

So the decision yesterday to transfer ownership of 10 hectares of the East Bayfront from the Toronto Economic Development Corp. to the city was good news.

As John Campbell, CEO of the Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corp., says: "The city has been doing some internal housekeeping. It's important because it simplifies the situation. It streamlines the process so developers know who they're dealing with."

The bad news is that TEDCO retains ownership of the foot of Jarvis St., where it has made a sweetheart deal to design and build a $150 million office building for Corus Entertainment.

The damage has been done there, but now the TWRC can continue with plans for mixed-use development from Jarvis to Parliament Sts.

"When the TWRC was formed," Campbell admits, "there probably wasn't enough thought given to how our mandate meshed with other agencies."

No doubt about that. Insiders describe a situation in which various public entities – more than 20 including TEDCO – are unable to agree on the ends and means of waterfront revitalization. On many occasions, these agencies have been at odds with one another, each scrambling for supremacy, each insisting that things be done its way.

This is hardly the way to create a great waterfront. Already we have seen serious compromises – Corus – and terrible lost opportunities. The foot of Yonge St., for example, will now be the site of a huge condo complex, exactly the wrong thing.

But now at least Campbell and his agency have established their claim to an important stretch of land south of Queens Quay along the shore of Lake Ontario. Their hope is to enter into long-term leases for commercial buildings, with a smattering of residential. From its founding in 2001, the TWRC has insisted the waterfront be developed as an employment centre as well as a residential neighbourhood.

This is as it should be, though one can't help but wonder whether revitalization might have been better able to grab the collective imagination if the land in question – which is, after all, close to the central waterfront – were slated to become, say, a park. But not just any park.

Look at what Chicago accomplished with Millennium Park, which has re-energized that city's downtown core and captured international attention. Of course, that facility cost a hefty $240 million (U.S.), which came mainly from the private sector. But the result is fabulous and universally admired.

No one here would dare suggest that Toronto take on such a project.

To be fair, plans for the East Bayfront do include Sherbourne Park, though it's unlikely to be nearly as ambitious as Millennium.

Still, yesterday's decision, which goes before full council next month, is a step in the right direction, That, coupled with the ceremonial groundbreaking of the West Don Lands flood protection berm yesterday, got the week off to an excellent start for the waterfront.

In both cases, the idea is that the public sector will focus on building the infrastructure to increase future land values, which will encourage private developers to invest.

As Campbell explains, the TWRC will handle public housing, parks, developer agreements and the like, leaving builders to assume the risks of demand and construction.

"The land isn't worth that much today," he argues. "We want to add value. And developers want to make sure they're not going to get caught up in jurisdictional disputes.

"It's a major milestone. We knew it was in the works, but we didn't think it would happen so quickly."



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Email chume@thestar.ca
 
What a crock. When this whole thing began, Hume was all for the TWRC's vision of a bustling employment and residential district on these lands. If I recall correctly, he took the time to chew out those who proposed a singularly green vision for the waterfront for not being sufficiently urban-minded... a sentiment that, I think, is just as valid now as it was then. Quite frankly, with all the parkland slated for the Portlands, I can't see how another massive park here would be desirable or economically viable.
Even when City Hall makes a wise, forward-thinking decision, Hume can't seem to help tossing around those old, tired "second-rate city" arguements he seems to love so much recently.
 
Good to see Waterfront Toronto taking the right steps.

Regarding a Millennium Park encore, I think it would be a major catalyst to drawing people to the water, but who says it needs to be on the main land?

We have our own version of Central Park staring at us from across the harbor. When (not if) the Centre Island airport finally closes, it would be the perfect location for an oasis in the heart of downtown.
We have a unique opportunity to not only replicate the success of Central Park and Millennium Park, but even surpass it because of the special geography of the land.

A well designed pedestrian bridge (I do love Gehry's serpentine like bridge @ Millennium Park) connecting the foot of Bathurst (home to Humanitas, Toronto's History museum) to a cultural and beautiful "Centre Island Park" with an outdoor performance venue would be a check-mate for the success of WaterfrontToronto's mission.

Now back to Chorus: I simply cannot understand why Diamond is designing this after showing that he's incapable of fitting in with the vision of beautiful public buildings. I mean, after the shit that he plumped down @ University + Queen, you would have thought that he wouldn't be getting much work in this town, let alone by a city agency....

Who would be willing to make a fuss about this with me? A protest? Flyers and posters on poles? We can't just sit back and allow yet another waterfront quay to be taken hostage by the interests of few.

Anybody interested?
 
At the very least, the "protest" should be played out in the media via ye ole letters to the editor.

I remember the Star publishing my incredibly witty (of course) letter regarding Diamond's operahouse design... I called it the "Hockey Hall of Shame" and expressed my concerns that tourists hoping to catch a Raptors or Leaf game would be lined up at the corner of Queen and University... only to be disappointed by a matinee of Wagner's Rinse Cycle.

Of course the letter did no good, but I was pleased to have the opportunity to give arrogant SOB the finger (my version of intelligent criticism).

Perhaps a Corus of Boos from UT members via letters to editor ... regarding Diamond's latest lump of coal... would be a useful way to position UT (the brand) as an alternative voice. Otherwise the media will just ask Harry what he thinks.
 
I really think there's something to be said for the idea of a pedestrian bridge to the island. I love the ferries, and I would never want cars driving over, but the ferry is just too expensive for many people. The choice of a bridge would make it much more accessible to a lot of people, particularly as a local park as well.
 
I like your bridge idea too Metroman, and another opportunity for a cool landmark...how about Calatrava?
 
unimaginative2 said:
I love the ferries, and I would never want cars driving over, but the ferry is just too expensive for many people.
Click to expand...

Then, why not cut the cost somehow? The TTC ran it until 1961; imagine using a Metropass to go to Wards or Hanlans...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top