Wellesley on the Park | 194.15m | 60s | Lanterra | KPMB

TheKingEast

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
6,139
Reaction score
3,386
Well, you can feel free to never enjoy that park, or any other parkland contribution. How people don't get the concept of a park being a greater public benefit to the neighbourhood than another tower is just beyond me.

Making a whole bunch of assumptions and waving your broad brush I see.
 

dsouzaman

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 5, 2017
Messages
10
Reaction score
16
Toronto has a pittance of parks compared to other great cities like London and Paris. It's disappointing how we've come to accept the current state from government. The downtown core, especially, has an absurdly low acres of parkland/person. The entire site should have been purchased as a park, but it's just not a priority for a city council that is keen to shit on the downtown core's liveability for the benefit of less dense areas.
 

Strange Advance

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 16, 2008
Messages
474
Reaction score
224
Location
Home of the Brave, Worlds Away
Toronto has a pittance of parks compared to other great cities like London and Paris. It's disappointing how we've come to accept the current state from government. The downtown core, especially, has an absurdly low acres of parkland/person. The entire site should have been purchased as a park, but it's just not a priority for a city council that is keen to shit on the downtown core's liveability for the benefit of less dense areas.
I agree with your general sentiment supporting more green space, but to say Toronto has few parks is nonsense. Toronto has 1,600 parks covering over 20,000 acres. Paris has about a quarter as many, and they cover about a third of the acreage.
 

Yegger

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 24, 2017
Messages
648
Reaction score
898
Location
Downtown
I agree with your general sentiment supporting more green space, but to say Toronto has few parks is nonsense. Toronto has 1,600 parks covering over 20,000 acres. Paris has about a quarter as many, and they cover about a third of the acreage.

The downtown is actually worse off than you mention. Naturally, the average is higher when you consider other areas of the city but the pressing need for parks is in the urban core as that is where the majority of growth is occurring.

upload_2018-7-26_17-27-38.png
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-7-26_17-27-38.png
    upload_2018-7-26_17-27-38.png
    293.2 KB · Views: 384

isaidso

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 23, 2007
Messages
1,789
Reaction score
1,506
For a city that talks about the pressing need for more green space why do we still end up with proposals like Wellesley on the Park? I like the design but this lot should have been green space. All of it. Then there's that huge parking lot bordering Queen East. It's one of the last empty lots left and not one stitch of it will be green space. What's going wrong and what needs to change so it doesn't happen again?

We're going to be in big trouble when the downtown population doubles and we'll have no one to blame but ourselves. We have opportunities but not taking advantage of any of them.

I worry that the next big opportunity lost will be Moss Park. Instead of relocating the military building and recreation centre beyond the lot I bet we'll end up as many buildings as we have now OR maybe even more. The rectangle bounded by Jarvis, Queen East, Sherbourne, and Shuter should be all green space. EVERY LAST SQUARE INCH OF IT. That block directly to the east with those nasty Community Housing blocks need to come down and that lot turned into 100% park as well. ALL OF IT. Build a new community housing tower BORDERING IT. But I suppose we'll just rebuild new towers right on that lot.

Then there's Rail Deck park. Will Toronto mess that up too?
 
Last edited:

LUVIT!

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 12, 2008
Messages
1,024
Reaction score
737
Well I suppose one of the reasons for this is because it is the central core with the most dense population therefore the stats may show less green space per person. Those are just that stats. Hopefully the railway park will be built to alleviate this issue. We do have Queens park, The islands, Yorkville park, Berczy park, Moss park, St. James park, The new College park, The over the subway parkettes plus various small parkettes. Riverdale zoo! Harbourfront! It is not an area without green space but could use more. More folks want to live downtown therefore more residential space is required as well.
 

CanadianNational

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
1,495
Reaction score
49
Location
Downtown Kitchener
Capture.PNG



Actually, I think it would be lovely - seeing as how this was all to be on the side of Safdie's mammoth proposed Opera House - it would be nice to have a little opera pavilion put up. It could be seasonal, for certain holidays or somesuch. (These photographs are a bit unfair as they give a glimpse of The Serpentine Pavilion competition winners from London, England...but, you get the idea.)
 

Attachments

  • Capture.PNG
    Capture.PNG
    1.3 MB · Views: 388
Last edited:

interchange42

Administrator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
24,836
Reaction score
25,028
Location
by the Humber
For a city that talks about the pressing need for more green space why do we still end up with proposals like Wellesley on the Park? I like the design but this lot should have been green space. All of it. Then there's that huge parking lot bordering Queen East. It's one of the last empty lots left and not one stitch of it will be green space. What's going wrong and what needs to change so it doesn't happen again?
The City has to have the money to both buy the land and to then build a park on it. It doesn't have enough to do that, especially where the land is zoned for development, or could reasonably be up-zoned for development. Those lots cost a fortune, which the City does not have.

You're wrong about the 88 Queen East site, by the way. There will be a park and a POPS plaza, along with a ew pedestrian mews gong down through the middle f the site. The park won't be huge, but there will be public realm improvements here.
We're going to be in big trouble when the downtown population doubles and we'll have no one to blame but ourselves. We have opportunities but not taking advantage of any of them.
That's why the City is pushing for Rail Deck Park: it's the last spot where substantial new park space can be created in the centre of the city.
I worry that the next big opportunity lost will be Moss Park. Instead of relocating the military building and recreation centre beyond the lot I bet we'll end up as many buildings as we have now OR maybe even more. The rectangle bounded by Jarvis, Queen East, Sherbourne, and Shuter should be all green space. EVERY LAST SQUARE INCH OF IT. That block directly to the east with those nasty Community Housing blocks need to come down and that lot turned into 100% park as well. ALL OF IT. Build a new community housing tower BORDERING IT. But I suppose we'll just rebuild new towers right on that lot.
You're not going to get any of those pipe dreams. The Community Centre is set to go in on the west end of the park. We have no idea what will happen to the Armoury. The affordable housing to the east is not being torn down.
Then there's Rail Deck park. Will Toronto mess that up too?
It's just a very expensive concept at this point. There are legal issues to be solved, and a huge money-crunch issue to be overcome. Ultimately we either find the money or it doesn't happen.

In the end, this is a thread about Wellesley on the Park, so bringing it back to that… we are lucky that the stars aligned here to get as much new park as we're getting. This fulfils Lanterra's park requirement for three nearby projects of theirs, and the rest of the land was not deemed too expensive for the City to buy.

42
 

Edward Skira

http://skyrisecities.com
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
14,684
Reaction score
14,817
Location
Toronto
74F079D4-EDB6-4649-B364-1FB6362D2B4C.jpeg
0E79F60F-C7D2-4549-9BD6-BE1D219CDE8A.jpeg
 

Attachments

  • 74F079D4-EDB6-4649-B364-1FB6362D2B4C.jpeg
    74F079D4-EDB6-4649-B364-1FB6362D2B4C.jpeg
    264.9 KB · Views: 367
  • 0E79F60F-C7D2-4549-9BD6-BE1D219CDE8A.jpeg
    0E79F60F-C7D2-4549-9BD6-BE1D219CDE8A.jpeg
    238.4 KB · Views: 337

Top