Toronto Sherbourne Common, Canada's Sugar Beach, and the Water's Edge Promenade | ?m | ?s | Waterfront Toronto | Teeple Architects

Yes, let's compare ourselves to Chicago, a city on the verge of bankruptcy. I'm not saying I don't think we should spend more on beautification, but please don't bring examples of cities that are doing it 100% wrong (spending money they don't have).
 
DtTO said:
Yes, let's compare ourselves to Chicago, a city on the verge of bankruptcy. I'm not saying I don't think we should spend more on beautification, but please don't bring examples of cities that are doing it 100% wrong (spending money they don't have).
Click to expand...

I agree - we shouldn't go down that route, but at the same time you really can't say we haven't struck a good balance between quality and spending. The Chicago example came about people who complain about how much we're spending without an awareness of just how expensive their preferred alternatives are.

AoD
 
+1. Especially with the newest wave of parks on the waterfront, and the developer funded models, such is 11 Wellesley (and the one behind Aura), I think we've struck a good balance. I'd rather $300 million be spent on infrastructure than a giant bean anyways.

The one thing that I wish the city would do is tear down the roundhouse and turn that into a decent downtown park instead of the cluttered mess that it is today, but that's just my opinion, and I'm sure many will disagree with that.
 
DtTO said:
Yes, let's compare ourselves to Chicago, a city on the verge of bankruptcy. I'm not saying I don't think we should spend more on beautification, but please don't bring examples of cities that are doing it 100% wrong (spending money they don't have).
Click to expand...

Much of their waterfront spending was done years ago when finances were better, if I'm not mistaken.
 
Last edited:
DtTO said:
+1. Especially with the newest wave of parks on the waterfront, and the developer funded models, such is 11 Wellesley (and the one behind Aura), I think we've struck a good balance. I'd rather $300 million be spent on infrastructure than a giant bean anyways.

The one thing that I wish the city would do is tear down the roundhouse and turn that into a decent downtown park instead of the cluttered mess that it is today, but that's just my opinion, and I'm sure many will disagree with that.
Click to expand...

Roundhouse Park is one of the most charming and distinctive parks in the city and you want to make it just a regular park like every other? Sure, let's have more of the same grass and trees crap, that we have in the other 90% percent of parks. I'll never understand people like you.
 
Torontovibe said:
Roundhouse Park is one of the most charming and distinctive parks in the city and you want to make it just a regular park like every other? Sure, let's have more of the same grass and trees crap, that we have in the other 90% percent of parks. I'll never understand people like you.
Click to expand...

Yes, because a Leon's furniture store in a crappy shed is a perfect idea of a park. I'll never understand people like you.

What makes you think I want it turned into a regular park anyways? Roundhouse should be Toronto's premier downtown park with a unique sculpture/display by a prominent artist.
 
I see the value of keeping the roundhouse - it spoke to the historical uses in the area, and it's is a unique heritage structure. The rest of the park is cheaply done - per city funded projects.

AoD
 
DtTO said:
Yes, because a Leon's furniture store in a crappy shed is a perfect idea of a park. I'll never understand people like you.
Click to expand...

I'll never understand people who want to tear down heritage buildings. Maybe one day we'll kick out Leon's and build the railway museum that was originally planned.
 
DtTO said:
Yes, because a Leon's furniture store in a crappy shed is a perfect idea of a park. I'll never understand people like you.

What makes you think I want it turned into a regular park anyways? Roundhouse should be Toronto's premier downtown park with a unique sculpture/display by a prominent artist.
Click to expand...

You can't even see past the Leon's store? You think the solution is to simply demolish heritage?

I'm afraid you sound like an insufferable fool. The park is great, and will only get much greater in the future with its heritage component intact.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
I agree - we shouldn't go down that route, but at the same time you really can't say we haven't struck a good balance between quality and spending. The Chicago example came about people who complain about how much we're spending without an awareness of just how expensive their preferred alternatives are.

AoD
Click to expand...

Even if you look at Chicago's fiscal problems, I doubt you'd find a lot of people who consider their waterfront investment a poor one.
 
I was down at Sherbourne Common last night and see that they are making a movie. Great, employment and all that!

However, to allow them to have a stunt where a car 'flies' into the lake from the foot of Lower Sherbourne they have cut down two (or 3) of the wonderful trees on the Waterfront Promenade. I assume they will be replanted (one day) but it is REALLY wrong to cut down mature and health trees for movie making. Even if replanted, the new trees will be smaller than others in the row and continue to look strange for several more years. I was told that Pam only found out about this by chance and managed to reduce the cutting from 4 to 2 and that things like this are decided by City Staff not by Council.

Pretty damned stupid in my opinion!
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top