Port Lands proposal is short-sighted
Revitalization has already begun with $1.25 billion pledged, plans to give land to film industry
Sometimes you have to wonder about Toronto. Has the city ever been so poorly run, so deeply confused and conflicted, or so badly led that it is now its own worst enemy?
The most recent example is the travesty currently unfolding down at the Port Lands. In case you’ve forgotten, the 356-hectare site, most of it unused, unserviced and certainly unloved, is slated for revitalization. That’s not going to happen tomorrow; Toronto’s waterfront, which runs from Etobicoke to Scarborough, encompasses a lot of real estate.
Still, the process has begun. Just last June, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Premier Kathleen Wynne and Mayor John Tory gathered on the shore of Lake Ontario to kick-start the remake with a pledge of $1.25 billion. Even by today’s standards that’s a whack of cash. It was put aside to renaturalize the mouth of the Don River and flood-proof the area at the west side of the Port Lands that ends up underwater when the Don overflows.
The mammoth undertaking is a precondition to transforming these lands into a fully mixed-use neighbourhood. It was conceived — naively perhaps — as the place where Toronto would enter the 21st century.
Though there’s not much to see now, the ingredients for urban excellence are all there — the lake, the Shipping Channel, the Keating Channel and enough space to do things properly.
No wonder Tony Coombes, the late planner who worked on waterfronts around the world, used to argue that the site — intelligently redeveloped — could become the most desirable neighbourhood in Toronto.
The project was conceived — naively perhaps — as the place where Toronto would enter the 21st century
Alas, at Toronto City Hall intelligence is conspicuous in its absence. At the risk of undermining plans that have evolved through nearly two decades of work by the tripartite agency that reports to all three levels of government, Waterfront Toronto, the city is now considering a plan that would hand over a significant chunk of the Port Lands to the film industry. Its scheme would give much of the site for massive movie studios, sound facilities and backlots. This would amount to building an industrial park on some of the most potentially valuable land in the city.
The mind boggles at the shortsightedness, the blinkered vision, the lack of ambition and imagination and the sheer thoughtlessness of such a plan. Sadly, Toronto has been trapped in a downward spiral of self-imposed littleness for a couple of decades now. How many cities in the world would happily hand over a major asset such as the Port Lands to an industry that could operate almost anywhere?
If the city didn’t have such a long and frankly embarrassing history on the waterfront going back to David Miller’s mayoralty, one might be shocked at the possibility of yet another outburst of civic wilfulness. Before this there was Doug Ford with his ferris wheel, Porter Airlines and its delusions of Toronto Island airport grandeur and — who could forget? — TEDCO (the now defunct Toronto Economic Development Corporation), which sought to establish a parallel waterfront revitalization plan.
And let’s not overlook the Toronto Port Authority, the federal agency that has historically viewed the harbour as its own corporate fiefdom. Adding insult to injury, our current chief magistrate appointed Denzil Minnan-Wong (Ward 34, Don Valley East) as the city’s representative to the board of Waterfront Toronto.
No wonder the agency has grown weary, wary and withdrawn. Still, its efforts have changed the way we think about the city south of the Gardiner Expressway. Sugar Beach, Sherbourne Common, Corktown Common, the new George Brown building, the West Don Lands; these are the new highlights of Toronto’s waterfront.
The idea goes before Toronto’s Planning and Growth Management Committee on Thursday.
That’s when a city-commissioned report, A Port Lands Framework Plan, will be discussed. That’s why so much rests on the outcome of the meeting.
As Toronto’s internationally respected planner Ken Greenberg makes clear, “This would be a throwback to something completely unsatisfactory. It’s frustrating and hard to understand. The centre is not holding. We need to reassert the primacy of Waterfront Toronto.”
John Wilson, co-founder of Waterfront for All, agrees. “We were promised a spectacular mixed-use waterfront,” he says. “But this goes completely against the plan. To privilege a single industry and develop the Port Land around its needs is not why we spent $1.25 billion.” Christopher Hume’s column appears weekly. He can be reached at jcwhume4@gmail.com