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

TOfan696 said:
The one thing that really surprised me was how diverse the group of people were ranging from families with young babies, to older couples, to younger people just suntanning and and relaxing with friends. All in all it is an amazing space and a great asset to the city
Click to expand...

I even saw a two gay couples making no bones about holding back from enjoying each other's company, one handsome duo is pictured below in the centre

 
I'm really glad Toronto is upping it game on the Waterfront. The fact that people are using this public place makes all the effort worth it.
 
Does anyone know what date the south part (south of Queen's Quay) of Sherbourne Common will be open to the public? I emailed Warerfront Toronto last week but didn't get a reply. I'm hoping it will have a "soft opening" like Sugar Beach did in early July.
 
Sugar beach is quite a gem, but I think that building Sherbourne Common might be excessive. How many parks do we need before a neighbourhood has even fully developed?
 
Hipster Duck said:
Sugar beach is quite a gem, but I think that building Sherbourne Common might be excessive. How many parks do we need before a neighbourhood has even fully developed?
Click to expand...

Seems smart to me. The parks are not being built in isolation, they are small cogs in a much larger plan that includes attracting residents and private businesses to invest in the surrounding areas. It might be tough to entice someone to drop hundreds of thousands of dollars on a condo to be built in the middle of an industrial wasteland with only vague promises that the surroundings will one day be nicer. But if the investment in the parks and public areas have already been made, the task will become easier. I'm sure the construction of these parks has not been cheap, but compared to the time and money required to construct buildings these are quick and affordable investments and I'm glad they've been made.

Most importantly, after years of discussion and heartbreak these parks help increase the number of things we can point to on our eastern waterfront that are (amost) complete. Psychologically this is invaluable.
 
CityPainter said:
I'm sure the construction of these parks has not been cheap, but compared to the time and money required to construct buildings these are quick and affordable investments
Click to expand...

Exactly. The parks are an integral part of the final development plan, so they will be built at some point, and if you want to attract good qualities businesses and residents to the area, you want to build the parks first.
 
Tulse said:
Exactly. The parks are an integral part of the final development plan, so they will be built at some point, and if you want to attract good qualities businesses and residents to the area, you want to build the parks first.
Click to expand...

Its true. It works in SimCity. :)
 
Rowe said:
Its true. It works in SimCity. :)
Click to expand...

Well, that is where I learned all I know about urban development.

On another note, I have a solution for Toronto's financial problems, involving a new financial instrument I call a "cheat code"...
 
Hipster:

Sugar beach is quite a gem, but I think that building Sherbourne Common might be excessive. How many parks do we need before a neighbourhood has even fully developed?
Click to expand...

I would agree with you in the perfect world where parks will be developed as need increases. However, since government funding doesn't necessarily follow a logical pattern, I am just glad that they've built it instead of risking either the project as a whole or in scope by putting it off.

AoD
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Hipster:



I would agree with you in the perfect world where parks will be developed as need increases. However, since government funding doesn't necessarily follow a logical pattern, I am just glad that they've built it instead of risking either the project as a whole or in scope by putting it off.

AoD
Click to expand...

I know what you mean, Alvin, but I don't think that the neighbourhood's integrity would in any way be compromised by not having this park built. Toronto is awash in semi-useless parks that were part of master-planned communities: the Douglas Coupland-designed park at Cityplace was being used by all of 5 souls when I visited on a beautiful 25C day; the playgrounds at the Roundhouse park were devoid of children; hardly anyone seems to use Liberty Village park, wedged between Canalfa and East Liberty street and ditto for Massey Harris Park, built as part of the DNA complex near King and Shaw. These are not bad parks. Instead, they are symptoms of a city where there are more parks than people. In such a scenario, people don't just retreat to the nearest park but to the park that has already established a certain amount of life and sense of place. I know: I could sit on the bench by myself on the weekends in College Park at the foot of my apartment, or I could gravitate over to the much more lively, more multi-purpose and much more established Grange Park several blocks away. To quote Jane Jacobs:

"Conventionally, neighborhoud parks...are considered boons conferred on the deprived populations of cities. Let us turn this thought around, and consider city parks deprived places that need the boon of life and appreciation conferred on them.
 
Hipster Duck said:
Toronto is awash in semi-useless parks that were part of master-planned communities: the Douglas Coupland-designed park at Cityplace was being used by all of 5 souls when I visited on a beautiful 25C day; the playgrounds at the Roundhouse park were devoid of children;
Click to expand...

I'm not sure these are fair examples, since the neighbourhoods of these parks are nowhere near their final residential density.
 
I love the variety of parks we have - in my neighbourhood, for instance, they range from Riverdale ( where a large crowd could easily get lost ... ) and Withrow ( a tremendous variety of uses for a medium-sized park ) to such mysterious, postage stamp sized green spaces as those that so unexpectedly exist between 51 and 59 Allen and between 204 and 212 Bain Avenues - which have somehow been granted to the people through the passage of time. I'm not sure how their value ought to be determined - the number of people per hour who use them, or what they use them for strikes me as too bean counter-ish a measure. The downtown waterfront has a similar range of parks ( some for passive enjoyment and some more programmed ) but I think the variety contributes to the whole.
 
Tulse said:
I'm not sure these are fair examples, since the neighbourhoods of these parks are nowhere near their final residential density.
Click to expand...

Not only that ... you should try visiting some of those parks on the weekend ... cityplace in particular, they're heavily used ...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top