The Waterfront Toronto Scam: Pink Umbrellas, Rocks, An Outhouse and Nails

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,724
3,235
113
CITY-BUILDING

Shored up: How Toronto's waterfront redevelopment is going right


Alex Bozikovic The Globe and Mail Last updated Friday, Jul. 25 2014, 6:25 PM EDT

On Unwin Avenue in Toronto’s port lands, the ground looks like a blank canvas: it’s largely a scrubland of asphalt and sumacs, punctuated by a power plant. The skyline of downtown shimmers like a mirage, but it’s just four kilometres away.

From here, it’s clear why governments see this area of the waterfront as ripe for development, and why the public agency Waterfront Toronto was created in 2001 to make that happen. But as the agency’s CEO John Campbell explains, it’s not as simple as it looks. “All the land south of Front Street is landfill,” said Mr. Campbell in an interview this week. “It’s all brownfield” – former industrial land, often contaminated – “and it shifts. The costs of building down here are exorbitantly high. That’s why nothing much has happened here for so long.”

Yet Waterfront Toronto is responsible for revitalizing about 2,000 acres of this waterfront land, an area roughly equal to the entire downtown core, while reporting to three levels of government.

Seen as a whole, this is the biggest project of its kind in the world. So far, the agency has spent nearly $1.5-billion on infrastructure, cleaning polluted soil, and creating new parks and places of extremely high design quality. It has brought in profitable and attractive private development with a serious green- building agenda.

And it has been largely free of controversy – until this month, when it faced claims of overspending from Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong and Mayor Rob Ford, and the mayor called for Mr. Campbell’s resignation. These attacks come just as it seeks $1.65-billion in funding for the next 10 years of its work.

Those deciding whether or not it gets that vote of confidence need to look at its record. Working quietly, the agency has become the great success story of Toronto urbanism in the 21st century.

Because the agency was created by all three levels of government, it has been able to pursue its long-term plan, which will take at least 25 years to complete, without being derailed by changes of government. The mayor, who seems to have forgotten that he was appointed to Waterfront Toronto’s board, can’t force Mr. Campbell out; Doug Ford couldn’t overrule years of planning with his ill-conceived pitch for a Ferris wheel and shopping mall.

The agency says that its first $1.26-billion in spending generated $622-million in direct revenue to government, plus $838-million in revenues from the development projects it has made possible. “It’s very close to break-even, plus much more in spinoffs already,” Mr. Campbell argues.

So far, the agency is doing large-scale development the right way. It is creating a series of cohesive new neighbourhoods, extending from Jarvis Street through the port lands, mixing public space, public buildings, and profitable private housing with a component of affordable rentals to create a real community.

The agency takes a long-term approach that sees both beauty and return on investment in building a 21st-century cityscape: vibrant day and night, pedestrian-friendly and focused on the street, and with broadband to support employment and entrepreneurship in tech and related fields. The goal is what Mr. Campbell calls “a pedestrian, high-quality, beautiful environment that has a quality of place that’s second to none.”

Urban beauty is a tool of economic development. “Talent and capital are mobile,” Mr. Campbell says. Keeping them here – attracting educated, entrepreneurial people who increasingly want to be in places that feel like cities – is the goal. Mr. Campbell, a career real estate executive who oversaw the completion of the BCE Place complex in the early 1990s, deeply understands the cultural shift that is drawing some businesses away from Bay Street towers toward hipper precincts. This insight guides waterfront development. “It’s about making the city’s quality of life and quality of place make us competitive in the long run,” he says.

“It’s an economic long game.”

Waterfront Toronto seems caught off-guard by the recent political attacks, particularly Mr. Campbell – a jovial man who’s as lean as a plank and seems boyishly enthusiastic about the agency’s mission. He is too proper a civil servant to argue with the mayor, but also a bit flummoxed. “If you ask my staff, I’m very tight-fisted when it comes to expenses and such,” he says. “It’s the Scottish blood in me.”

To execute its vision, the agency has started with public space: 23 new or improved parks. Following the wisdom that’s driven port lands redevelopments across Europe and the Americas, the agency understands that creating a sense of place is crucial in making new neighbourhoods. They’ve used design competitions to hire some of the best landscape architects in the world to do this.

Take Sugar Beach. The two-acre park opened in 2010 at the foot of Jarvis Street, the point where the busy central waterfront starts to dissolve into a terra incognita of light industry and parking lots.



cont'd ......
 

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,724
3,235
113
....cont'd......

The park, designed by Montreal’s Claude Cormier and Associates, is a showcase, and isn’t a “beach” in any real sense; it is a public square for a very dense neighbourhood that is coming into being. The office building next door houses radio station The Edge; when they host in-studio performances, audiences of up to 1,000 spill out onto Sugar Beach’s paved plaza. Mounds of granite, transported from a Quebec hillside, provide a lunchtime perch for office workers and students from the George Brown health campus that’s opened one building down; condo-dwellers from the St. Lawrence neighbourhood now come here to sunbathe or take their toddlers to the splash pad.

A certain amount of hardiness and rigour, not to mention quality of place, was required. These are among Waterfront Toronto’s core principles.“We’ve got to get this right,” says Mr. Campbell. “It’s a once-in-100-years opportunity; you can’t jerry-rig it. We have to make sure that the quality is there, and it’s something we’re all proud of.”

Cormier’s landscape architecture firm won a design competition; changed their design following rigorous feedback from the public and the competition’s judges; and then the construction of the project went out for competitive bidding.

For this and for each of Waterfront Toronto’s capital projects, the agency must submit a formal application for funds that is vetted by the city, province and federal governments. That vetting process, Mr. Campbell says, has taken an average of six months for each project. “This idea that we don’t have oversight – we have more oversight than you can shake a stick at,” he says.

And the results in the case of Sugar Beach are extremely strong. The park functions well as public space and also as an Instagram-able landmark. The sugary white sand is a welcome place to sunbathe, against the backdrop of a cargo ship parked at the Redpath Sugar plant just across the water. It meets the granite mounds, which Claude Cormier calls “rock candy,” to form a playful tableau.

And those beach “umbrellas,” now notorious after Mr. Minnan-Wong’s attack on their price tag of $11,565 each, are solid. They are tough fiberglass on a stainless-steel structure; each stands on a concrete base about three metres square. In its shaft, each holds an LED light fixture, weatherproof and controllable. This is not lawn furniture. It’s infrastructure, built to survive wild crowds and January winds and stand up for a thousand selfies.

The need for all this will be clear when the neighbourhood is fully built out, which is happening rapidly. Next door, Waterfront Toronto is building a Waterfront Innovation Centre in two buildings adjacent to the park, to house tech companies and draw on the ultra-high-speed broadband Internet service that they have brought into the area.

Workers and others will be able to live nearby: developers Hines and Tridel have a 363-unit building under construction next door, and a second phase is coming. They’ll be part of a well-planned neighbourhood that includes small, pedestrian-friendly streets lined with retail, designed to mitigate the sense of corporate sameness that comes with all large development projects.

That is an important concern, and WT is right to worry about it: The agency’s plan is to build 40,000 residential units, which will house an estimated 115,000 people.

This whole area of the city is changing almost by the hour. Right across the street from Sugar Beach is the 2.8-acre site of The Guvernment nightclub; it’s owned by developers Daniels, who are planning a mixed-use development that might include four separate buildings. This is not a Waterfront Toronto project, but it is subject to a city design review panel – through which new buildings get critiqued by a group of top design professionals.

And a sophisticated context has been set by the parks, the excellent office and college buildings, by Diamond Schmitt and KPMB, and the nearby condos currently under construction – including the River City project a few blocks away, by Montreal architects Saucier and Perrotte, a complex of what are the most adventurous and handsome residential buildings in the city. Their developers, Urban Capital, won the right to build here after submitting a competitive bid to WT. And while the agency picked their proposal based on a mix of criteria including design quality, it also included the highest financial return for the agency and governments. That has happened, says Mr. Campbell, with each of the agency’s condo deals so far. “We set the bar high,” he says. “Developers see that there’s room here for a high-quality product. We all win.”

For many Torontonians, that sounds too good to be true. For 200 years the waterfront has been a place where grand dreams go to drown. The idea that a government agency is accomplishing something here, and doing it right, is hard to imagine. But it’s true. To show off the vision, Mr. Campbell took me to the new park, Corktown Common, at the foot of River Street, which opened officially this month. I was there a few times last year, and the park looked great. This week it looked even better: lushly green, the playgrounds full, a new artificial wetland humming with life, and the skyline in front filling in nicely. It suggests what the port lands could look like in a generation. It’s a vision of Toronto’s future going surprisingly right.
 

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,724
3,235
113
Posted for:

1) that lazy ass ceremonial Mayor who couldn't be bothered and didn't care to perform the duties that were required of him

2) for the whiny, little opportunist council member Denzil M. Wong, who claims to know the cost of everything, even a nail. but knows the value of nothing

3) for that lazy ass pseudo-Mayor who doesn't even know where Sugar Beach is or what Waterfront Toronto is

4) for those faux fiscal conservatives, those Gravy Train supporting BDL subway extension advocates; for those penny pinching yet billion dollar wasting Neanderthals


Waterfront Toronto and it's developments and plans are true value, vision and what makes and should make the city of Toronto a livable city.

Sure as heck beats casinos, Ferris wheels, monorails, big box stores, wax museums, and go kart tracks.
 

Marla

Active member
Mar 29, 2010
1,563
12
38
60
ajax
Off of the topic but of interest, in the 1800's the port of Lake Ontario came up to the south building of the St. Lawrence Market. One wonders how stable the land is today.
 

Art Mann

sapiosexual
May 10, 2010
2,900
3
0
Chicago's magnificent Grant Park was once a landfill site, filled with rubble and ash following the spectacular 1871 fire that destroyed much of the urban core.
 

MattRoxx

Call me anti-fascist
Nov 13, 2011
6,752
3
0
I get around.
WT's been doing good work I just wish it was happening faster.
Used to work in the Portlands and since I spent 10-12 hours a day there, sometimes more, I wondered about the long term effects of the 'contaminated' soil. If it's not suitable for residence why is it okay to work there!
And jutting out into the lake made winters bitterly cold, bleak and desolate so I hope they include some wind breaking treed areas in the plans.

Off of the topic but of interest, in the 1800's the port of Lake Ontario came up to the south building of the St. Lawrence Market. One wonders how stable the land is today.
Possible future:

 

james t kirk

Well-known member
Aug 17, 2001
24,037
3,885
113
One of the (many) reasons I despise Bob and Doug Ford is their outlook on The Waterfront. These 2 clowns have absolutely no knowledge whatsoever when it comes to planning, architecture, landscape design or Engineering. They should just stay the hell away. (I recall them wanting to tear down The Hearn and build a NFL stadium on the site in order to attract a NFL team to Toronto. Those two idiots stated that they could build a stadium using the footings from the Hearn. Make me laugh.) And then it was some giant ferris wheel and a shopping mall. That was their great fucking idea.

I saw on the news Mayor McCheese spouting off about $600,000.00 being spent for a washroom like it was somehow stolen money. My thoughts were:

1. What did the construction of said washroom include? Was it just a toilet sitting in the middle of a laneway, or was said toilet housed in a new structure? Was the toilet connected to water and sewage? Were there also partititions, multiple toilets, lights, sinks, HVAC, flooring, walls, doors, etc?

2. Was not said toilet publically tendered and the project awarded to the lowest qualified bidder?

Saying that we spent 600 grand on a toilet in mock outrage as if it were some sort of crime is meaningless if one does not offer up the context in which said toilet was constructed.

Brothers Ford are absolute morons.
 

james t kirk

Well-known member
Aug 17, 2001
24,037
3,885
113
WT's been doing good work I just wish it was happening faster.
Used to work in the Portlands and since I spent 10-12 hours a day there, sometimes more, I wondered about the long term effects of the 'contaminated' soil. If it's not suitable for residence why is it okay to work there!
And jutting out into the lake made winters bitterly cold, bleak and desolate so I hope they include some wind breaking treed areas in the plans.


Possible future:

Cool pic, but I think if something so catastrophic were to hit to cause the CN tower to topple over and snap into pieces, the roof on SkyDome would not still be intact. You could fly a 747 into the CN tower and the plane would be sheared in half, but the tower would still stand. In contrast, the roof on SkyDome is quite frail. In your pic, the SkyDome should look more like the coliseum in Rome.

As to the soil (working vs. residential), I know it doesn't take a lot for soil be considered "contaminated". The word contaminated congers up visions of green glowing soil from Love Canal. The truth is, there are several different classifications of "contaminated soil". To be suitable for residential disposal, soil has to be clean fill Even the presence of road salt will earn soil the label of "contaminated" and not suitable for residential disposal, but in fact suitable for ICI disposal (Industrial, Commercial, Institutional) under the MOE guidelines. After that, you get into soil that can only be disposed of at MOE landfill sites and finally you get into "hazardous" disposal sites (where they take the green glowing soil from Love Canal.)

I can ASSURE you that if you knew what was in the ground water down at Commissioners Street and Carlaw you would be fucking amazed that there isn't a huge cleanup underway (think former Shell Lubricants tank farm that used to be situated where the new(ish) Toronto Hydro Offices are.) Dig down 20 feet and you can have free motor oil for your car.
 

Ref

Committee Member
Oct 29, 2002
5,110
1,036
113
web.archive.org
As to the soil (working vs. residential), I know it doesn't take a lot for soil be considered "contaminated". The word contaminated congers up visions of green glowing soil from Love Canal. The truth is, there are several different classifications of "contaminated soil". To be suitable for residential disposal, soil has to be clean fill Even the presence of road salt will earn soil the label of "contaminated" and not suitable for residential disposal, but in fact suitable for ICI disposal (Industrial, Commercial, Institutional) under the MOE guidelines. After that, you get into soil that can only be disposed of at MOE landfill sites and finally you get into "hazardous" disposal sites (where they take the green glowing soil from Love Canal.)
A few years back I worked in rural Eastern Ontario and a local plant decided to buy an old garage adjacent to their plant to build an extension. It was unbelievable the amount of soil they had to dig up and pipe out of there just to be able to use the land.

I could only imagine the cost it would be on a large scale project like east of downtown Toronto.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
30,277
4,463
113
Yup. Our waterfront is shit. And it took a lot longer than 4 years to make it so. Started even before amalgamation in fact. The old city council would have had to approve of the development as it now stands. As well as the first few.

Chow was apart of those too wasn't she?
 

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,724
3,235
113
Yes Chow was 'apart' FROM those too.
 

MattRoxx

Call me anti-fascist
Nov 13, 2011
6,752
3
0
I get around.
Yup. Our waterfront is shit. And it took a lot longer than 4 years to make it so. Started even before amalgamation in fact. The old city council would have had to approve of the development as it now stands. As well as the first few.

Chow was a part of those too wasn't she?
No, the Gardiner Expressway was built in 1966, she was just a kid back then.
 

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,724
3,235
113
No, the Gardiner Expressway was built in 1966, she was just a kid back then.
And the 'HarbourFront' Corporation was a Federal Crown Corporartion enacted by law in 1972 and which had some success.

'WaterFront Toronto' was a tripartite agreement enacted by law in 2001.

All good things on the waterfront and rectification of the bad, stem mostly from 2001 on the lands administered by Waterfront Toronto despite the after the fact protestations and whining of Ford, Wong, mall developers, casino operators, circus promoters, go kart operators, big box stores, De Luce and the rest who claim to know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
30,277
4,463
113
Sorry guys. She was a Toronto City councillor during what would have been the planning and approval of a lot of the condo development that has cut the city off. During her time nothing good came of the waterfront. While she didn't initiate most of it she would have been part of the approval process. Condos can take up to 15 years to approve. She was there.

Another retread. Just like Ford. We don't need either of them.
 

explorerzip

Well-known member
Jul 27, 2006
8,127
1,295
113
One of the (many) reasons I despise Bob and Doug Ford is their outlook on The Waterfront. These 2 clowns have absolutely no knowledge whatsoever when it comes to planning, architecture, landscape design or Engineering. They should just stay the hell away. (I recall them wanting to tear down The Hearn and build a NFL stadium on the site in order to attract a NFL team to Toronto. Those two idiots stated that they could build a stadium using the footings from the Hearn. Make me laugh.) And then it was some giant ferris wheel and a shopping mall. That was their great fucking idea.

I saw on the news Mayor McCheese spouting off about $600,000.00 being spent for a washroom like it was somehow stolen money. My thoughts were:

1. What did the construction of said washroom include? Was it just a toilet sitting in the middle of a laneway, or was said toilet housed in a new structure? Was the toilet connected to water and sewage? Were there also partititions, multiple toilets, lights, sinks, HVAC, flooring, walls, doors, etc?

2. Was not said toilet publically tendered and the project awarded to the lowest qualified bidder?

Saying that we spent 600 grand on a toilet in mock outrage as if it were some sort of crime is meaningless if one does not offer up the context in which said toilet was constructed.

Brothers Ford are absolute morons.
You forgot about their plan to put a ferris wheel and monorail in the same area.
 

Anbarandy

Bitter House****
Apr 27, 2006
10,724
3,235
113
Sorry guys. She was a Toronto City councillor during what would have been the planning and approval of a lot of the condo development that has cut the city off. During her time nothing good came of the waterfront. While she didn't initiate most of it she would have been part of the approval process. Condos can take up to 15 years to approve. She was there.

Another retread. Just like Ford. We don't need either of them.
Forty years ago, the central lakefront was a veritable wasteland of derelict industrial buildings. Devoid of green spaces, recreational facilities and cultural attractions, it was in need of a change.

In 1972, ************ Trudeau's federal government created a Crown corporation with a mandate to revitalize 100 central acres of waterfront land stretching west from York Street to Stadium Road. Culture, education and recreation were to be the tools that would bring Torontonians back to the lake and attract visitors from around the globe. In 1976, Harbourfront Corporation was formed to fulfil this mandate and initiate change

Harbourfront Centre was established in 1991 as a not-for-profit charity to carry on this legacy, and the site was transformed into an international platform for theatre, dance, literature, music, film, visual arts, fine craft and cultural celebration. With over 4,000 events and programmes each year, Harbourfront Centre has become a model of urban revitalization, inspiring San Francisco, London, Tokyo, Chicago and others to follow suit.

Part of Harbourfront Centre's charm is that it has retained and restored the original industrial buildings, creating a spacious campus-like site. These symbols of Toronto's past have emerged as vibrant new centres of creativity, from the Fleck Dance Theatre and Harbourfront Centre Theatre to The Power Plant Contemporary Art Gallery and WestJet Stage. Bill Boyle Artport, which was formerly a trucking warehouse, is the central hub of Harbourfront Centre, housing administrative offices, multiple performance venues, exhibition spaces and our Craft & Design Studio.

Harbourfront Centre is one of Canada's most popular tourist attractions – and one of the most unique and creative cultural centres in the world – drawing more than 17 million repeat annual visitors and contributing millions of dollars to the local economy each year. Since 2005, Harbourfront Centre has been working on a series of projects that continue to transform the waterfront. Some of these improvements include an extension of the boardwalk, a 300-stall underground parking garage and three new public spaces: Canada Square, Ontario Square and Exhibition Common. And this is only the beginning of the remarkable and pioneering changes planned for the southern edge of Canada's largest city.

Harbourfront Centre has always been an innovative force in Toronto's cultural scene, introducing audiences to bold and brilliant new artists and art forms from around the world. The many events that visitors enjoy include the World Stage contemporary performance series, NextSteps national dance series, International Festival of Authors, summer festival weekends, contemporary exhibitions in visual art and architecture, Artists-in-Residence in the Craft & Design Studio and so much more.

And that's why Harbourfront Centre means many things to so many people. To some, Harbourfront Centre is the heart of the community – a public place offering Toronto residents a wide range of educational programmes and recreational activities; to others, it is an international cultural centre – a collection of waterfront venues showcasing the finest talent from Canada and around the world; and to others still, it is simply a stretch of urban waterfront – a quiet refuge and the perfect place in which to take a stroll, to reflect and to enjoy life in one of the greatest, most creative cities on earth.


As you can read, and as you can see along the lands known as HarbourFront that were under administration of the federal Crown Corporation formerly known as HarbourFront Corporation, stretching from York St. to Stadium, it has been quite a success.

And as you stated Chow was a part of council from 1993 I believe till 2005, then you should also state she a part of the success of the waterfront whereas Ford was, is and always will be an obstructionist and after the fact whiner to such success.
 

Viggo Rasmussen

New member
Feb 5, 2010
2,652
0
0
Ford was, is and always will be an obstructionist and after the fact whiner to such success.
Butler1000 and John Tory voted for Ford last time despite his long track record of obstruction, bullying and whining.
Tory is the developers best friend in this campaign and doesn't give a shit about making the waterfront better for the people at large.
 

ANN GALLERIE

New member
May 13, 2014
8
0
0
Global
I was strolling in Leslieville last month - it seems that, like everywhere else, every square meter is earmarked for condo development. Not withstanding pseudoboulders and umbrellas as art, we can safely assume that this land is being cleared for - - - 3 guesses! More condos.

I applaud initiatives like museums, Harbourfront, and all-night gyms.

Meanwhile, in Toronto, we don't have a robust infrastructure for our current population. Per Wikipedia, the Gardiner is now backed up $626 Million in repairs. Seems there was no stainless steel rebar back then.

Naaaaah.....wait for another piece of concrete to hit Lakeshore....
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
30,277
4,463
113
Butler1000 and John Tory voted for Ford last time despite his long track record of obstruction, bullying and whining.
Tory is the developers best friend in this campaign and doesn't give a shit about making the waterfront better for the people at large.
I voted for Ford spefically to send a message to the unions and get get transit on the table.

I stand by that. Smitherman had a much worse track record.

Chow's whil decent local politician doesn't have what it takes to be Mayor in my opinion. Her ejection from the police services board troubles me. She hasn't shown anything that I would call vision for the city. So far just 15 per year for a 10% increase in buses(a plan the TTC has stated as unworkable) and 6 million per year for arts and crafts programs after school. Oh and "ban" guns in the city.

That's about it so far. The last two debates she has said nothing of substance. She is another retread. Same old same old.

And when it comes to Harbourfront.....its federal right? But the condos that all went up are all municipal decisions. And approved while now the lack of infrastructure has come to the fore. Bad planning. She was a cog in that machine.

And she never minded the public purse in all that time. Her trying to pass herself off as a fiscal conservative is laughable. There is a hidden agenda with her. And that's why her polling numbers are so poor. People know it.

No I won't vote for Chow. No more retreads.
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,768
3
0
If it is fill that probably means that buildings can't be more than seven or eight stories tall. Perhaps the best use is to turn it into a landscaped lakefront park?
 
Toronto Escorts