Orbit | ?m | ?s | Cortel Group

lead82

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
1,378
Reaction score
592
Location
Forest Hill
I agree. This is why new greenfield developments almost always fail to meet their vision and objective. The rendering looks fancy but this will be purely residential. Why would someone want to live in a high rise that is at least a 90 min train ride to a major city? There is nothing there. Also, having all new buildings don't encourage or allow for diversity of uses so everything is new housing. Cornell is a good example of failed new urbanism. There is nothing urban in that community. It's a more dense but still car-dependent sprawl.

If the government really wanted to eliminate sprawl we have hundreds of communities in southern Ontario that have been hollowed out and could use an injection of new life/development that have existing and under-utilized services. For example, why aren't we growing communities like Brantford, or Cobourg, or Stratford or any others that are on existing train lines have good bones that can support growth. Heck, even our existing GTA suburbs are highly car-dependent sprawl and can use more investment to densify them. Places like Newmarket, Aurora, Oakville come to mind.
 

Scotian

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 19, 2014
Messages
37
Reaction score
40
I agree. This is why new greenfield developments almost always fail to meet their vision and objective. The rendering looks fancy but this will be purely residential. Why would someone want to live in a high rise that is at least a 90 min train ride to a major city? There is nothing there. Also, having all new buildings don't encourage or allow for diversity of uses so everything is new housing. Cornell is a good example of failed new urbanism. There is nothing urban in that community. It's a more dense but still car-dependent sprawl.

If the government really wanted to eliminate sprawl we have hundreds of communities in southern Ontario that have been hollowed out and could use an injection of new life/development that have existing and under-utilized services. For example, why aren't we growing communities like Brantford, or Cobourg, or Stratford or any others that are on existing train lines have good bones that can support growth. Heck, even our existing GTA suburbs are highly car-dependent sprawl and can use more investment to densify them. Places like Newmarket, Aurora, Oakville come to mind.
I don't know about the rest but Oakville has cranes everywhere these days. Brantford, Cobourg and Stratford are pretty far from Toronto to attract as many people as a place like Innisfil and other than Cobourg none of those sit on a lake.
 

Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
22,250
Reaction score
55,474
Location
Toronto/EY
I agree. This is why new greenfield developments almost always fail to meet their vision and objective. The rendering looks fancy but this will be purely residential. Why would someone want to live in a high rise that is at least a 90 min train ride to a major city? There is nothing there. Also, having all new buildings don't encourage or allow for diversity of uses so everything is new housing. Cornell is a good example of failed new urbanism. There is nothing urban in that community. It's a more dense but still car-dependent sprawl.

If the government really wanted to eliminate sprawl we have hundreds of communities in southern Ontario that have been hollowed out and could use an injection of new life/development that have existing and under-utilized services. For example, why aren't we growing communities like Brantford, or Cobourg, or Stratford or any others that are on existing train lines have good bones that can support growth. Heck, even our existing GTA suburbs are highly car-dependent sprawl and can use more investment to densify them. Places like Newmarket, Aurora, Oakville come to mind.

Brantford is beginning to see development, there are at least 1/2 a dozen mid-rise/hi-rises proposed or u/c there now.

There's a thread over at SSP on them:

 

afransen

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
6,002
Reaction score
5,702
The rendering is cool - but I'm willing to bet this will end up being another sprawling, dreary, car-centric suburb if it gets built.
I would say it looks 'interesting' in the Le Corbusier manner of admiring geometrical patterns from a god's eye view above. From a livability standpoint, the urban design looks like it will fail. Windswept open areas with a big arterial running through the heart of the community.
 

innsertnamehere

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
17,543
Reaction score
17,258
I would say it looks 'interesting' in the Le Corbusier manner of admiring geometrical patterns from a god's eye view above. From a livability standpoint, the urban design looks like it will fail. Windswept open areas with a big arterial running through the heart of the community.
I share the concerns but want to see some more detailed plans before rendering a judgement. Right now it's just a couple of very high level renderings.
 

TJ O'Pootertoot

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
3,182
Reaction score
1,828
I completely understand looking at this and wondering what it'll actually mean in reality but I would bear a couple of things in mind, especially if we're talking about sprawl and stuff.

1) Simcoe County and Innisfil are in the Growth Plan.
Simcoe's population is "required" to increase from 344K (2020) to 555k by 2051.
This does not include Barrie and while they have not yet broken it down by the local municipalities, obviously a chunk of that is going to Innisfil.
And since the Province is building a GO station there, it makes sense that you want to maximize the development there.
So, at least a policy level, assume that population growth in Innisfil is a given, as is the GO station.

We can each say "Who'd wanna live in sprawl 90 mins from Toronto?!" but these are policy requirements so, start there.

2) This is a concept plan that was developed to lobby the Province for the GO station and MZO. It's not a real block plan or master plan. They won't be building pyramids and weird sci-fi buildings.

Innisfil has shown a willingness to try to some different stuff (see: using Uber for public transit) and I think it's admirable.
So, what does get built might not like at all like this and, yes, it might not work. But in the big picture, I think it's good they're trying and we'll see how it all shakes out, I guess.

(As to whether Cornell is "failed," I think that's debatable. But I would certainly agree that it is hard to achieve the full range of new-urbanist objectives [a true mixed-use neighbourhood] on the urban fringe. OTOH, it's clear that a lot of the design principles behind Cornell have become extremely common [reduced setbacks, front porches, rear garages, more parks etc.] and I think it's simplistic to say, "well, it's just nicer sprawl! or to say there is "nothing urban" about it.
But we'll save that for another thread :) )
 

UtakataNoAnnex

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 5, 2020
Messages
4,343
Reaction score
6,119

Copper1212

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
91
Reaction score
47
I agree. This is why new greenfield developments almost always fail to meet their vision and objective. The rendering looks fancy but this will be purely residential. Why would someone want to live in a high rise that is at least a 90 min train ride to a major city? There is nothing there. Also, having all new buildings don't encourage or allow for diversity of uses so everything is new housing. Cornell is a good example of failed new urbanism. There is nothing urban in that community. It's a more dense but still car-dependent sprawl.

If the government really wanted to eliminate sprawl we have hundreds of communities in southern Ontario that have been hollowed out and could use an injection of new life/development that have existing and under-utilized services. For example, why aren't we growing communities like Brantford, or Cobourg, or Stratford or any others that are on existing train lines have good bones that can support growth. Heck, even our existing GTA suburbs are highly car-dependent sprawl and can use more investment to densify them. Places like Newmarket, Aurora, Oakville come to mind.

Cobourg has been growing quite a bit. There are developments on all sides of it and downtown.
 

rbt

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
7,153
Reaction score
3,275
Appears GO station construction is expected to start sometime (likely late fall) this year.

According to Tim Cane, Orbit Director for the Town of Innisfil, the developer, Cortel Group, and Metrolinx have agreements in place to advance construction of the GO station with a ground-breaking in 2022. He said the town expects to see designs in early in 2022 and that the MZO issued by the province has helped the process.

 

SaugeenJunction

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 23, 2014
Messages
2,736
Reaction score
5,885
Looks like the Orbit has come back down to earth (at least design-wise). The buildings look more normal now. Late October consultation PDF here (heads up, it’s 49 mb for those on cellular).

1E389C43-1EF5-49A0-90DD-C10CF8CB96F5.jpeg


Here is an accompanying article about the meeting:

Innisfil gets sneak peek into town’s future at Orbit meeting

 

Top