Toronto West Don Lands: Blocks 17 & 26 | 141m | 43s | Aspen Ridge | Core Architects

On density.. Toronto packs all its growth into a few places. We know this. So let’s compare two new neighbourhoods.

The West Don Lands plan is for 6000 units on 80
acres. In South Etobicoke, 2150 Lake Shore plan is for 7446 units on 27.6 acres.

WDL will have one quarter the density. And vastly better transit, vastly better amenities, all walkable to King and Bay.

How does this make sense?
I agree w/the principle you're advocating here............but I am curious how you get the 80 acres?

Including everything within the area I understand to be the WDL, excluding only Corktown Common Park and the Flood Protection Landform (which was necessary in order to develop the land)

I get 63 acres.

Even if you add in the entirety of Corktown Common I get 70 acres.

Am I missing a parcel somewhere?


1614396763197.png
 

Attachments

  • 1614396349884.png
    1614396349884.png
    2.5 MB · Views: 124
Last edited:
It will, at minimum, triple in population, likely much more. That doesn't include any development slated to happen south of the railroad tracks. I agree with some of the issues regarding how this area was developed, but I also think that "ghost town" is hyperbole. I think there are valuable lessons that should be applied to other masterplanned communities, both good and bad.
Triple the amount of people on front street today still isn’t much. That’s the problem - there is this massive public realm that has a handful of people in it at any given time.

Any time I’ve been down there I could probably count the amount of people on Front Street on my hands. Tripling that isn’t going to make a bustling urban environment- it’s going to create the bare minimum required to support any sort of retail. More is needed to actually make the neighbourhood thrive.
 
Triple the amount of people on front street today still isn’t much. That’s the problem - there is this massive public realm that has a handful of people in it at any given time.

Any time I’ve been down there I could probably count the amount of people on Front Street on my hands. Tripling that isn’t going to make a bustling urban environment- it’s going to create the bare minimum required to support any sort of retail. More is needed to actually make the neighbourhood thrive.

This statement is borderline preposterous. '

1614424607991.png


The density shown above is greater than the vast majority of vital retail streets in Toronto.

We could argue for more; and that's fine; but to suggest that that is required for vital retail.....???

Let me refresh your memory on the density of Greektown:

1614424735993.png


And Chinatown:

1614424802238.png


And the Esplanade:

1614424906851.png


The issue w/the sidewalk busy-ness in this area is a function of:

Lack of a critical mass of retail.

Lack of a destination retail draw.

Lack of a patio culture that the sidewalk affords room for in spades.

Excess sidewalk and road width which make the number of pedestrians seem smaller than it is; and that then lends that deserted feeling even when its not.

Half the width below would be ample for pedestrian flow; the remainder either shouldn't exist, or it should be patio-row:

1614425161667.png


The cold colour palate here is also an issue.

Notice extensive use of brick and warm tones in the examples I provided above.

Also, typically, a finer-grained retail form. The buildings feel bulky, and sterile.

By all means we could have put some additional density here; but when I see the exaggerations in this thread................I don't think its helpful....
 
Last edited:
I know new forum member @emphur revealed this over in the Canary Commons thread; but worth repeating here, that the new supermarket, which is Marcheleo’s Gourmet Marketplace" should make a quite a difference to
retail vitality.

This is a step up in size from their Eglinton location:

1614426432353.png


This is their other spot, on Wynford Drive:

1614426601758.png
 
Another thing to remember: if you want to be nitpicky, the St. Lawrence Neighbourhood to the W--the prototypical example of this kind of town planning in Toronto--has never exactly been "teeming with life", either. Yet nobody's called *it* out as a flop.
 
it’s february and we're in a pandemic guys..

there was a noticeable uptick in traffic in the neighborhood last summer after block 16 occupied. 50% of the canary district is still under construction or undeveloped and there's also WDL 3/4/7 on the way. i'm enjoying corktown common not being packed to the brim while i can
 
I agree w/the principle your advocating here............but I am curious how you get the 80 acres?

Including everything within the area I understand to be the WDL, excluding only Corktown Common Park and the Flood Protection Landform (which was necessary in order to develop the land)

I get 63 acres.

Even if you add in the entirety of Corktown Common I get 70 acres.

Am I missing a parcel somewhere?

Looks like another 10 or so acres if you bring the perimeter right to Bayview and the rwy. The area does seem a bit on the lower density side relative to other new downtown builds, or relative to St Lawrence or Esplanade. Or is that an illusion on account of the roads and sidewalks seeming fairly wide.
 
Looks like another 10 or so acres if you bring the perimeter right to Bayview and the rwy. The area does seem a bit on the lower density side relative to other new downtown builds, or relative to St Lawrence or Esplanade. Or is that an illusion on account of the roads and sidewalks seeming fairly wide.

Right.

But right to Bayview is the Flood Protection Landform, which can't be built on; and which was necessary in order to build anything.

That being the case, it would be unreasonable, in my opinion, to include it any density calculation.
 
I definitely wish the build form had more texture and color in the west don lands, even if the buildings on their own are built well. It’s just a bit too much glass.

Thats also why it’s so important to leverage this historic site and to retain and integrate its existing built form into a development here. I would also say that it matters that Block 13 is able to also add more color and texture to the area when it is planned. Block 10 is incorporating a lot of brick which is helpful. Block 3/4/7 also has a lot of texture. Block 8 is under construction, and there’s some serious density proposed for block 20 as well.

This area has so much more coming to it. It’s also situated between the future East Harbor district, which is primarily business, and the distillery district, which is a huge cultural destination. The Portland’s are just to the south. This site has the potential to be an attraction in of itself. As more people come to the neighborhood to live and more travel through it, retail will improve and change.

I don’t really think this area is too sparse right now, but I really don’t see this place being sparse 5-10 years now either. This is a brand new neighborhood, and we haven’t even begun to see it’s best days yet.
 
It's still not quite the same as calling it a "flop"--and it's had as much of a history of being taken for task for its brick monotony as WDL-type neighbourhoods have been for glassy "condo aesthetic" modernity...
 
The Province's so called 'consultation" is closing soon. This from West Dona Lands Committee may inspire more input from UTers?

Only 4 more days to make a submission to the province on saving the Dominion Foundry:


This “consultation” on demolition closes Mar 4th -
here’s where to send your comments We are also suggesting that you copy info@respectlocalplanning.com with your comments. Friends of the Foundry is

An invitation to send a comment to an email address from a page with no context info and no mention of “heritage” or “demolition” does not inspire confidence that this is a sincerely meaningful consultation. However, we are encouraging people and organizations to provide comments about the proposed demolition and the lack of consultation with the community and the City on the future of this site.

The Friends of the Foundry website is a rich source of information that you can draw on in formulating a submission:
  • Friends of the Foundry Open Letter - this was sent to the Premier and Ministers Clark, Macleod & Scott last Wed as part of a media conference at which we presented the KPMB + friends demonstration concept to show the value of retaining heritage.
  • Imagined Futures - showing three possibilities for a future that preserves heritage buildings - by KPMB, IRCPA, Urban Strategies
    • of course we have real life examples of adaptive re-use and heritage conservation: the Distiller District, 51 Division HQ, Canadian Opera Company offices - farther afield - Evergreen Brickworks, Wychwood Barns. They all challenge the provincial claim that the Foundry buildings must come down
  • Documentation- includes
    • the Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) was completed in secret last fall and is at the centre of the legal dispute with the province. It was not completed by an independent heritage expert (as required by heritage guidelines) and assumes demolition, rather than analyzing the options for the heritage buildings.
    • The secret sale - the HIA also tells us about a secret agreement to sell the foundry to an unnamed purchaser. To date, the Province has not revealed the name of the purchaser and has not explained why the land was sold secretly to a single purchaser without a public offering. Every other sale of WDL development blocks to private developers has gone through an open transparent public process.
    • The affordable housing smoke screen - Also in the HIA are some details of the development deal the province has made. This is not an affordable housing project.
      • 75% of the density is private market condos!
      • For the 25% affordable, there are no details of the level of affordability, and
      • the period of affordability is only 40 years.
      • Contrast that with the rest of the West Don Lands affordable housing projects.
        • The existing projects are 100% affordable in perpetuity.
        • The Dream/Kilmer/Tricon mixed market rental projects are 30% affordable for the full 99 year lease - after which, the land reverts to the province
Also part of the provincial consultation: As previously reported, last Wednesday, the WDL, SLNA and CRBA were invited to make presentations to very senior provincial staff "on how some elements of the existing structures could inform development of affordable housing on the site.” We were told that provincial staff were attending in a listening capacity only and, in fact, there was no exchange or discussion. The WDLC and SLNA did a joint presentation which included the Friends of the Foundry demonstration concept and Backgrounder

Please feel free to make use of any of these materials in your submission to the consultation. And don’t forget to copy Friends of the Foundry: info@respectlocalplanning.com so we have a record of what you have said to the province.
 
Last edited:
Possibly the Foundry site, the project's tenure (purpose-built rental), location, and construction timeline all fit the description:


The Joint Venture's first project has been placed under contract and is located in Toronto's Downtown East neighbourhood. The development is expected to consist of two towers totalling 870 units on a 1.8 acre site, and will feature a mix of 1, 2, and 3-bedroom units as well as an amenity package that includes a commercial quality fitness facility, rooftop garden, outdoor pool, 24/7 concierge, automated parcel management system, bike lockers, and a half-acre public park. The location is a short walk to a future Ontario Line subway station, and benefits from convenient walking proximity to the downtown Toronto Central Business District. The total development cost is expected to be approximately C$600 million, including approximately C$192 million of equity capital contributed from the JV, of which Tricon's share is approximately C$58 million. Construction is expected to commence on the site in early 2022 with completion expected in 2025, pending closing of the transaction.
 

Back
Top