Toronto East Harbour | 214.2m | 65s | Cadillac Fairview | Adamson

[salsa]

Renderings.

 

[interchange42]

Just to caution everyone, those are very preliminary renderings: not only have architects not been selected for the buildings yet (including the station), but neither has the master plan been accepted by the City yet.

42

 

[44 North]

From the Star. Appears they are going to go with 'East Harbour' as the marketing name.

*mods* note the name, please.

https://www.thestar.com/life/homes/...r-where-toronto-will-go-to-work-and-play.html

Of note, an apparent target of 2018 to commence construction, and leasing discussions apparently already under way.

"East Harbour" is an interesting name. Naturally it's better than 'the Unilever site', or 'that old soap factory'. But at the same time I find it a bit misleading. It's not on the harbour, not actually on any water body (even the Don), and falls outside WaterfrontToronto's jurisdiction.

One thing I'm wondering is how this site's massive expectations for office / retail / residential will play-out alongside the 3C site at Cherry/Lake Shore. That was also a very ambitious proposal, yet we really haven't heard much about in quite some time. Both 3C and East Harbour are contingent on the Don Mouth naturalization in order to build a single structure, and both seemingly contingent on transit being in place.

I also expect a bit of a battle with regards to RER station placement. Everyone is in unanimous agreement that an RER station will be built at Unilever/"East Harbour". But I feel that the 3C development was proposed years earlier, so could also be considered deserving of a station. I also recall landowners in the East Bayfront publicly asking for a SmartTrack/RER station, and Tory publicly saying they would get one too (it was sometime last year iirc). But having two commuter rail stations less than a km apart doesn't make sense.

Either way, very interesting stuff. With Regent Park, Distillery, WDL, LDL, EBF, Port Lands, Gardiner, DRL, RER, Unilever, Riverside, and numerous peripheral projects - it's clear this one little pocket of the city is one of the most dynamic and promising, if not the most dynamic and promising. And arguably in all the Americas too.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

I also expect a bit of a battle with regards to RER station placement. Everyone is in unanimous agreement that an RER station will be built at Unilever/"East Harbour". But I feel that the 3C development was proposed years earlier, so could also be considered deserving of a station. I also recall landowners in the East Bayfront publicly asking for a SmartTrack/RER station, and Tory publicly saying they would get one too (it was sometime last year iirc). But having two commuter rail stations less than a km apart doesn't make sense.

Place it over the Don River - with a bit of work in station design you can serve both.

AoD

 

[interchange42]

From the Star. Appears they are going to go with 'East Harbour' as the marketing name.

*mods* note the name, please.

I don't think we will change the name for the 21 Don Roadway thread, but save it for a separate site-wide thread. We will probably carve this thread into two sometime soon, depending on the focus of the posts.

42

 

[clarkburglar]

Here are some more renders.
http://firstgulf.com/portfolio/east-harbour/#
http://project21.firstgulf.com/

 

[rdaner]

These renderings were produced by OMA, no? I just hope that it doesn't turn into a bit of a dead zone at night like La Defense in Paris.

 

[interchange42]

Yes, they are likely from OMA. Agreed that the area should probably not be all commercial. I think it's great that they are pushing for so much office here, and a good amount of retail, but there should be residential in the mix too. I wonder where the Planning Department is on all of this at the moment…

42

 

[maestro]

"East Harbour" is an interesting name. Naturally it's better than 'the Unilever site', or 'that old soap factory'. But at the same time I find it a bit misleading. It's not on the harbour, not actually on any water body (even the Don), and falls outside WaterfrontToronto's jurisdiction.

One thing I'm wondering is how this site's massive expectations for office / retail / residential will play-out alongside the 3C site at Cherry/Lake Shore. That was also a very ambitious proposal, yet we really haven't heard much about in quite some time. Both 3C and East Harbour are contingent on the Don Mouth naturalization in order to build a single structure, and both seemingly contingent on transit being in place.

I also expect a bit of a battle with regards to RER station placement. Everyone is in unanimous agreement that an RER station will be built at Unilever/"East Harbour". But I feel that the 3C development was proposed years earlier, so could also be considered deserving of a station. I also recall landowners in the East Bayfront publicly asking for a SmartTrack/RER station, and Tory publicly saying they would get one too (it was sometime last year iirc). But having two commuter rail stations less than a km apart doesn't make sense.

Either way, very interesting stuff. With Regent Park, Distillery, WDL, LDL, EBF, Port Lands, Gardiner, DRL, RER, Unilever, Riverside, and numerous peripheral projects - it's clear this one little pocket of the city is one of the most dynamic and promising, if not the most dynamic and promising. And arguably in all the Americas too.

Sunlight Park. Named after the old baseball stadium that stood where Riverside Square will be built and got its eventual name from the old the soap factory.

 

[Skeezix]

Yes, they are likely from OMA. Agreed that the area should probably not be all commercial. I think it's great that they are pushing for so much office here, and a good amount of retail, but there should be residential in the mix too. I wonder where the Planning Department is on all of this at the moment…

42

These are designated employment lands. I'm pretty sure the Planning Department would not look kindly to adding residential to the mix, given applicable city and provincial policies. At least in the early stages. What might happen over the course of a multi-year build out, I don't know.

 

[interchange42]

If the City is willing to modify the zoning to add a ton of office space, then I hope they would not be too dogmatic here about not including residential. Planning is negotiating on the similarly significant Mondelez Lands and the Celestica Lands in two other parts of town, and it's time that they recognized that if original low-slung, spread-out industrial uses do not have a realistic chance of persisting in these areas, that mixed use is the way to go. Yes, get a pile of office into this area, but get some residential in too to avoid an evening dead zone, like @rdaner is concerned about.

42

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Having said that it wouldn't be a big deal if commercial (not office per se - but hotel, retail, entertainment) is a dominant land use, given the vast amounts of residential space around the site.

AoD

 

[torontologist]

I think the current plan is to have a lot of residential just south of Lake Shore as part of the Portlands redevelopment, particularly along the Broadview Extension. This was apparent in the Portlands vision documents released by WaterfrontTO about six months back.

If the city is absolutely determined to keep these as Employment Lands, they should rezone the north side of Eastern Ave as multi-family residential. Otherwise, the place is going to be dead at night, as interchange42 said.

 

[Skeezix]

If the City is willing to modify the zoning to add a ton of office space, then I hope they would not be too dogmatic here about not including residential. Planning is negotiating on the similarly significant Mondelez Lands and the Celestica Lands in two other parts of town, and it's time that they recognized that if original low-slung, spread-out industrial uses do not have a realistic chance of persisting in these areas, that mixed use is the way to go. Yes, get a pile of office into this area, but get some residential in too to avoid an evening dead zone, like @rdaner is concerned about.

42

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but I don't think that will happen anytime soon. It's not about being dogmatic, per se, but both the City, through its Official Plan, and the Province have strengthened their policies to protect the long-term supply of employment lands. There is plenty of land designated for residential uses in this part of town. I doubt mixed-use permissions will be on the agenda for this site anytime soon, if ever. I imagine there will be a large retail/entertainment component, complimentary (and subordinate) to the office component.

 

[interchange42]

If the area is to have 12,000,000 square feet of commercial space, converting 1,000,000 square feet of it to residential wouldn't destroy the vastly commercial nature of it, and in the meantime, there will eventually be far more people employed on these lands than there have ever been. I think the City should be looking at the total number of jobs provided on the land, not the total number of acres with employment uses on them. That's industrial revolution thinking, and we're a couple of revolutions past that now.

42