Toronto East Downtown Planning Review

[gmania]

Saw this on the City Council agenda for today. Item TE35.96. Doesn't have an immediate affect on the city, but maybe in the future we will see some new high-rise developments in this area.

The Toronto and East York Community Council recommends that:

1. City Council direct the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning to conduct a full local area review for the lands designated in the Official Plan as Mixed Use and Neighbourhood adjacent to Dundas Street East between George Street and Sherbourne Street, and on Sherbourne Street between Dundas Street East and Shuter Street, with the intention to permit high-rise residential development, and report to the Toronto and East York Community Council by February 2011.

2. City Council direct the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning to include Dundas Street East between Jarvis Street and Sherbourne Street, and Sherbourne Street between Dundas Street East and Shuter Street in the Tall Buildings Study.

Summary
Dundas Street East and Sherbourne Street are identified on Map 3 of the Official Plan as major streets. The area has road capacity, is well served by transit, pedestrian and cycling facilities. The area characterized by mixed use development which includes highrise residential development. The area of Dundas Street East and Sherbourne Street is socially and economically depressed and as a result has not had any redevelopment occur during the last five years. The area has the highest crime rate in the City of Toronto.

The Motions are meant to accomplish a local area review with the intention to permit highrise residential development in lands designated Mixed Use and Neighbourhood in the Official Plan along Dundas Street East between George Street and Sherbourne Street, and on Sherbourne Street between Dundas Street East and Shuter Street.

Here's the link to the pdf: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2010/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-31729.pdf

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Probably has something to do with the proposal to redevelop Seaton House.

AoD

 

[DSC]

There is this City planning Department web-page on this Study. Nothing much recent but .. http://www.toronto.ca/planning/downtown-east-study.htm

 

[kkgg7]

There is this City planning Department web-page on this Study. Nothing much recent but .. http://www.toronto.ca/planning/downtown-east-study.htm

that should be the first area to be redeveloped. the minute you step past the OMNI building on Dundas East, you enter a land of poverty and despair. Many third world cities look nicer.

 

[Jonny5]

that should be the first area to be redeveloped. the minute you step past the OMNI building on Dundas East, you enter a land of poverty and despair. Many third world cities look nicer.

/translate BLAH BLAH BLAH Pay attention to me!!! BLAH BLAH BLAH

 

[cdr108]

/translate BLAH BLAH BLAH Pay attention to me!!! BLAH BLAH BLAH

that should be the first area to be redeveloped. the minute you step past the OMNI building on Dundas East, you enter a land of poverty and despair. Many third world cities look nicer.

no, translation ...
i bought a spec condo at Pace @ Jarvis/Dundas and need to make money on it before i flip it

 

[taal]

that should be the first area to be redeveloped. the minute you step past the OMNI building on Dundas East, you enter a land of poverty and despair. Many third world cities look nicer.

meh I frequent the area quite often, I think your taking it too far ... you should visit the downtown of some other depressed cities in Ontario to get a better understanding of what is really bad.

Having said that, I agree ideally, seeing how it's so close to the core, it'd be a lot nicer.


ONe thing to keep in mind, the core is pretty big at the end of the day, particularly if you include the King W/E - Queen W/E strips i.e. there's a lot of land and only so much to go around at one time.

 

[neubilder]

This planning review reminds me of the 'solutions' that were undertaken in the 1950's to deal with poverty; urban renewal in the form of high-rise redevelopment. Sound like Pruitt Igoe or Regent Park?

Despite the apparent issues with poverty in the area, I think it's actually one of the more interesting parts of the city. It's very historic, it's adjacent to some remarkably intact stretches of 19th century brick rowhouses, and there are some very good urban heritage buildings at stake here as well - places like Filmores Hotel, whose walls could tell a million stories I'm sure. Not to mention the rare instance of the curve in Dundas at this point. The only real blights in the area are the highrises.
I hope they don't throw the baby out with the bathwater on this one, in their attempts to 'clean up the hood'.

 

[neubilder]

Here is a more recent report:

http://www.toronto.ca/planning/pdf/downtown-east-preliminary-report.pdf

 

[kkgg7]

meh I frequent the area quite often, I think your taking it too far ... you should visit the downtown of some other depressed cities in Ontario to get a better understanding of what is really bad.
Having said that, I agree ideally, seeing how it's so close to the core, it'd be a lot nicer.
ONe thing to keep in mind, the core is pretty big at the end of the day, particularly if you include the King W/E - Queen W/E strips i.e. there's a lot of land and only so much to go around at one time.

I admit I took it too far I just abhor that area, especially when it occupies such a prime location. Dundas/Jarvis is only 5 minutes walking from Eaton Centre!

The Gerrard/Queen-Church/Sherbourne area needs some redevelopment and vast gentrification. I don't want to sound snobbish, but if a mid income person doesn't want to go to an area, that means it needs work. Both residential and business should be brought to this particular area. It has beautiful Allen Garden, the less beautiful Moss Park, and a few great looking churches.

Why not build some chic highrises, condos or hotels, overlooking these garden/park? It can be a great selling point. Or convert some of the row houses into boutique shops, like the Backbay area in Boston (not like Queen west, which I don't like at all)? I know I am just dreaming, but obviously a lot can be done to make our downtown eastside more pleasant and attractive.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

kkgg7 its nice to see you back buddy. Don't get banned again eh?

 

[kkgg7]

kkgg7 its nice to see you back buddy. Don't get banned again eh?

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Ha

 

[CanadianNational]

It's good to see that this area is being looked at as a whole for careful regulation and redevelopment. Admittedly, it really needs it. Dundas and Sherboune is an intersection that has been steeped in human troubles, and still has more than it's share.
Like a lot of Toronto, the main here streets are hit and miss, but the side streets are beautiful. The side streets to Sherbourne, running north-south, are richly tree-lined and full of great historic domestic architecture. I wouldn't want to see this area's architectural character and history victimized by unfettered and piecemeal development.
It looks like the document is urging great sensitivity to the existing context - that's good to hear. I don't much like the sound of high-rises, though - some of the most notable failures and unpleasant building types in the examined area are modern buildings.

I would hardly know how to begin to suggest solutions to the situation regarding the over-saturation of poverty in the area without sounding like a git. In the north of the examined area is Seaton House - a tremendous weight of trouble on the neighbourhood. Personally, I would like to see it's capacity re-distributed around the downtown and the city (even enlarged, if needed) through multiple new small buildings that can be absorbed by their neighbourhoods - and the Seaton house building itself demolished. It's too much for the neighbourhood to take. I think alternatives to the Maxwell Meighen shelter in the south at Queen and Sherbourne should also be looked at.

After that - well, a lot of the historic buildings are in good shape, though subdivided within into low-income apartments. Maybe over time this could be slowly remedied and improved, without the emphatic exclusions that accompany gentrification.

It's not a neighbourhood for harsh measures. It's not a blank slate. I guess we'll have to see what comes up in actual planning before it can be said whether it's suitable or not. I'd like to see the main streets through here concertedly and thorougly improved first. I think a lot of the rest would take care of itself, over time.