Toronto Lower Don Lands Redevelopment | ?m | ?s | Waterfront Toronto

Great shots sky candy thx.

Just noticed your 1,300 posts have a reaction score of over 13,000. My 2,100 posts have a reaction score of 75.77.

I'm old enough to remember when the edict "size doesn't matter" was comfort to many 😭
 
Towered said:
Such a massive project. It's amazing that it's not the talk of the town.
Click to expand...

There's been talk about it for more than a decade. From 2011, at this link...

Doug Ford’s dream waterfront? Ferris wheel, monorail and a boat-in hotel

Councillor Doug Ford has laid out his most detailed vision for Toronto’s eastern waterfront, with a monorail skimming along the shore, a 1.6-million-square-foot “megamall” and island airport users boating right into their hotel lobby.

Ford, the brother and closest adviser of Mayor Rob Ford, laid out his vision in an interview Tuesday morning on CBC Radio’s Metro Morning.

The interview came on the heels of the Ford administration revealing it wants to seize control of port lands redevelopment from Waterfront Toronto, a tripartite agency to which Ottawa, Queen’s Park and the city have each contributed $500 million.

In the interview, Doug Ford laid out a much grander vision than Waterfront Toronto’s existing plan — lauded by planners and developers, but criticized by the Ford administration as moving too slowly—for a vibrant residential community that would incorporate stores and parks.

“What we’d like to do is have a monorail system that’s running right from the Pan Am Games (site) right along the lakefront and stops at Union Station and Ontario Place and right across the front of the lake,” Ford said.

“And then it would hang a quick little right, right down Cherry St., and as it goes down Cherry St. the first stop would be right at the end of the pier.

“You would have some just beautiful iconic buildings, hotels, you’d be able to get to the hotel from boat, from train or from the airport and it’d be the only hotel that you’d be able to get off the plane, throw your luggage in a boat and pull right into the lobby and unload it.

“And the second stop would be down by Lake Ontario Park, Cherry Beach, and you’d have just 250 acres of beautiful beachfront. You’d be able to picnic, bike, jog and then the next stop would be the megamall.

“It would be 1.6 million square feet of one of the most prestigious malls in Canada. We’d try to attract Nordstrom and Bloomingdales and Macy’s ...

“And the last stop is the Hearn Station, and that would be a multi-use facility with ice rinks on the base and soccer pitches on the top, retail on the back end and then the monorail would come back up to Union Station. It would be absolutely spectacular, it could be the most prestigious address in Canada and we need to develop it.”

The Ford administration has not publicly released its detailed vision for the port lands but the councillor said it made an impression when unveiled recently to an unspecified group.

“We had 15 people in the room and everyone’s jaw just dropped when they saw it. It is spectacular, just spectacular.”

Later, at a news conference at City Hall, Ford said he has received interest from developers but would not provide details. He said he wants the city to sell its roughly 170 waterfront acres to developers who would pay for the attractions plus infrastructure such as roads.

The councillor said he hopes to have looming over all of it the world’s biggest Ferris wheel, similar to England’s London Eye, but that would be “just a cash cow.”

Ford’s interview on CBC Radio — after he and his brother have long been cool to the public broadcaster — seemed aimed at putting pressure on Premier Dalton McGuinty’s Liberal government, which is on the cusp of a provincial election and is resisting the city’s port lands takeover plan.

The office of provincial Infrastructure Minister Bob Chiarelli told the Star on Monday that “the province remains committed to Waterfront Toronto’s mandate and their ongoing work in revitalizing Toronto’s waterfront.”

And Glen Murray, minister of research and innovation, said a city decision to pull out of the port lands partnership would jeopardize the broader waterfront strategy. “All of the projects are interrelated; you can’t just pull one piece out. It’s important that governments stick to the plan and not change the plan halfway through,” Murray said.

The office of federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty would not comment directly on the city’s proposal, but said federal participation in Waterfront Toronto is “winding down” because $492 million of its $500 million contribution has been spent.

The city can negotiate to withdraw from the port lands deal and, if those talks fail, unilaterally pull out within nine months.
Click to expand...

Mayor (Rob) Ford’s executive committee will next week vote on a city manager recommendation to take back its port land properties because Waterfront Toronto has not come up with a plan to pay for the flood prevention project that must be completed before development can proceed.

Council, however, approved the $634 million flood prevention strategy just last year, on the advice of senior bureaucrats, on the understanding that a funding plan would come later. Funding was not expected to be found by now, said Waterfront Toronto spokeswoman Michelle Noble.

“They asked us to report back with a business case. And that’s something we’ve been working on.”
Click to expand...
 
janschot said:
Controversial take: Millennium Park is too big and is a border vacuum. Ours will be better. Our waterfront (Harbourfront) is already better than Chicago's.
Click to expand...
I would say that Grant Park on the whole is this- it lacks activation on its eastern borders, and is divided up by several excessively large roadways and railway tracks. It's in reality several smaller parks rather than one- of which Millenium Park is probably the most successful because of its proximity to the CBD and other attractors (i.e. the Chicago Institute of Art) + its own internal attractors (i.e. the Bean or the fountain).

cd concept said:
I can see that there's a green park that's integrated with condos on the rendering ! But just imagine an iconic satilite park like Chicago has in its waterfront blended in those waterways that are proposed. Replace the condos area with attractions and entertainment venues
Click to expand...
The site is too far from the city centre to ever be a formal central city park, IMO.
 
Last edited:
cd concept said:
I don't understand why they have to integrate housing etc on this huge property. When they could create Toronto style Central Park equip with a zoo and other entertainment amenities! Just look at the aerial view photo up above of the construction site!
Click to expand...

I agree 100%

IMO it could have been way better if this project didn't include any type of buildings on the site, but instead it created a single huge waterfront park with recreational attractions like the Marina Bay in Singapore. Or even just a huge botanic green park without any big construction on it.

1.jpg




jje1000 said:
The site is too far from the city centre to ever be a formal central city park, IMO.
Click to expand...

I think he meant 'Central Park' as an allegory for big park.

The site isn't that far from the city center, and besides it really doesn't matter, it could have been a big waterfront park, that is what it would have made it attractive.
 
The site is too far from the city centre to ever be a formal central city park, IMO.
[/QUOTE]

There's going to be another style financial center with more than 10 million sq feet of office proposed anchored by a major new transit hub. Not mention all the condos that will be built around it. Also behind this proposed park is the ever expanding movie industry that can utilize the park for making movies etc. That why I think something like the Chicago style waterfront park with entertainment etc . would really class up the area which Toronto needs . I can’t show you the image of Chicago's waterfront with the skyline around it because of copyright ! But those who seen those pictures know what I mean!
 
urbanflight said:
I agree 100%

IMO it could have been way better if this project didn't include any type of buildings on the site, but instead it created a single huge waterfront park with recreational attractions like the Marina Bay in Singapore. Or even just a huge botanic green park without any big construction on it.

1.jpg



I think he meant 'Central Park' as an allegory for big park.

The site isn't that far from the city center, and besides it really doesn't matter, it could have been a big waterfront park, that is what it would have made it attractive.
Click to expand...

A good chunk of the greenery in LDL is in the floodplain (part of the rerouted Don River) - which is where you don't want to put this type of structures in. The actual park space is large, but not that large. Centre Island is a far better choice for what you have in mind.

AoD
 
BejewelledCarp said:
I'm not sure how final this is, but it blows my mind that they wouldn't just put the bike lane beside the sidewalk, protected from the street by the planting strip.
Click to expand...
Usually I would agree with you but this isn’t going to be a major thoroughfare and probably won’t have that much traffic. The trail and commissioners will take the brunt of bike and car traffic
 
smably said:
Right, but... why not make it parking-protected by default? What's the advantage to putting the bike lane next to the car lane? Who wants cars driving across the bike lane to get to or from parking spots?
Click to expand...
Yes, this design is curiously out of date with current practice to put the bike lanes beside the curb. Hopefully, they’ll change it.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top