DOCSLIB.ORG

Heritage Inventory CULTURAL HERITAGE RESOURCE ASSESSMENT: BUILT HERITAGE RESOURCES and CULTURAL HERITAGE LANDSCAPES

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Heritage Inventory CULTURAL HERITAGE RESOURCE ASSESSMENT: BUILT HERITAGE RESOURCES and CULTURAL HERITAGE LANDSCAPES Heritage Inventory CULTURAL HERITAGE RESOURCE ASSESSMENT: BUILT HERITAGE RESOURCES AND CULTURAL HERITAGE LANDSCAPES EXISTING CONDITIONS – PRELIMINARY IMPACT ASSESSMENT LOWER YONGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CITY OF TORONTO, ONTARIO Prepared for: Meghan Bratt, MCIP, RPP MMM Group 2655 North Sheridan Way, Suite 300 Mississauga, ON L5K 2P8 ASI File: 15EA-220 March 2016 (Updated July 2016) Archaeological & Cultural ASI H e r i t a g e Se r v i c es 528 Bathurst Street Toronto, ONTARIO M5S 2P9 T 416-966-1069 F 416-966-9723 ASIheritage.ca Cultural Heritage Resource Assessment Lower Yonge Precinct City of Toronto, Ontario Page ii CULTURAL HERITAGE RESOURCE ASSESSMENT: BUILT HERITAGE RESOURCES AND CULTURAL HERITAGE LANDSCAPES EXISTING CONDITIONS -– PRELIMINARY IMPACT ASSESSMENT LOWER YONGE CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CITY OF TORONTO, ONTARIO EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ASI was contracted by MMM Group (MMM) to conduct a Cultural Heritage Resource Assessment (CHRA) of the Lower Yonge Precinct as part of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment Study and Public Realm Concept. The scope of the project includes completing Phase 3 and 4 requirements for the Schedule ‘C’ of the Municipal Class EA process. Based upon a review of previous reports as well as historic and large-scale orthographic mapping, 18 previously identified Cultural Heritage Resources were located within or adjacent to the study area, as outlined below. • one is designated under Part III.1 of the Ontario Heritage Act (CHR 2), • seven are Designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act (CHR 5, CHR 11, CHR 12, CHR 13, CHR 14, CHR 15, and CHR 16), • seven are Designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act (CHR 4, CHR 5, CHR 6, CHR 8, CHR 9, CHR 17, and CHR 18), • one is identified in the Lower Yonge Precinct Transportation Master Plan (CHR 3), • one is identified under the Union Station Rail Corridor EA (CHR 7), and • two are listed on the City of Toronto’s Heritage Register (CHR 1 and 10). Based on the results of background data collection and assessment of impacts of the study area and proposed development, the following preliminary recommendations were developed for the Lower Yonge Precinct EA. These recommendations may require revision once more detailed designs of the study area have been finalized and provided to ASI. 1. A proposed detailed design should be provided to ensure construction activities and development boundaries are consistent with these recommendations. 2. Where Cultural Heritage Resources are expected to be impacted through alteration to their setting, a resource-specific Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment should be conducted at the earliest possible stage of the detailed design stage, to evaluate the cultural heritage value of the resource, identify cultural heritage attributes, and develop appropriate mitigation measures. A Heritage Impact Assessment should be conducted for CHR 1. 3. Should future work require an expansion of the Lower Yonge Precinct EA study area then a qualified heritage consultant should be contacted in order to confirm the impacts of the proposed work on potential cultural heritage resources. In particular, if direct or indirect impacts are proposed for CHR 2, CHR 4, CHR 5, CHR 8, CHR 9, and CHR 10 a property specific Heritage Impact Assessment should be completed for the individual property. ASI Cultural Heritage Resource Assessment Lower Yonge Precinct City of Toronto, Ontario Page iii 4. Once finalized, this report should be submitted to the Ministry of Tourism, Culture, and Sport (MTCS) and the City of Toronto, Heritage Preservation Services, for review and comment ASI Cultural Heritage Resource Assessment Lower Yonge Precinct City of Toronto, Ontario Page iv Figure 1: Location of identified cultural heritage ASI Cultural Heritage Resource Assessment Lower Yonge Precinct City of Toronto, Ontario Page v PROJECT PERSONNEL Senior Project Manager: Lindsay Graves, MA Cultural Heritage Specialist Assistant Manager, Cultural Heritage Division Cultural Heritage Specialist: Joel Konrad, PhD Cultural Heritage Specialist Project Coordinator: Sarah Jagelewski, Hon. BA Staff Archaeologist Assistant Manager, Environmental Assessment Division Project Administration: Carol Bella, Hon. BA Research Archaeologist Administrative Assistant Report Preparation: Joel Konrad Graphics: Blake Williams, MLitt Geomatics Specialist Report Reviewer: Lindsay Graves, MA Cultural Heritage Specialist ASI Cultural Heritage Resource Assessment Lower Yonge Precinct City of Toronto, Ontario Page vi TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................... ii PROJECT PERSONNEL ......................................................................................................................................... v 1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 BUILT HERITAGE RESOURCE AND CULTURAL HERITAGE LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT CONTEXT ................... 1 2.1 Legislation and Policy Context .......................................................................................................... 1 2.2 Municipal Policies ............................................................................................................................ 6 2.2.1 City of Toronto ........................................................................................................................... 6 2.3 Data Collection ................................................................................................................................. 8 3.0 BUILT HERITAGE RESOURCE AND CULTURAL HERITAGE LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT ................................ 10 3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 10 3.2 Township Survey and Settlement.................................................................................................... 10 3.2.1 City of Toronto ......................................................................................................................... 10 3.3 Review of Historic Mapping ............................................................................................................ 13 3.4 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................................ 16 3.4.1 Lower Yonge Precinct – Existing Conditions ............................................................................. 17 3.4.2 Lower Yonge Precinct – Identified Cultural Heritage Resources ................................................. 18 3.5 Screening for Potential Impacts ..................................................................................................... xxi 3.5.1 Potential Impacts to Cultural Heritage Resources ................................................................... xxii 4.0 CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................................. xxv 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................................ xxv 6.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................................................... 27 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Location of identified cultural heritage ............................................................................................. iv Figure 2: Location of the study area................................................................................................................. 1 Figure 3: The study area overlaid on the 1851 mapping. ................................................................................. 14 Figure 4: The study area overlaid on 1860 mapping. ...................................................................................... 14 Figure 5: The study area overlaid on 1878 mapping. ...................................................................................... 14 Figure 6: The study area overlaid on 1909 Mapping. ...................................................................................... 14 Figure 7: The study area overlaid on 1918 Mapping. ........................................................................................ 15 Figure 8: The study area overlaid on 1921 Mapping. ....................................................................................... 15 Figure 9: The study area overlaid on 1931 Mapping. ........................................................................................ 15 Figure 10: The study area overlaid on 1984 Mapping. ..................................................................................... 15 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Summary of Cultural Heritage Resources (CHR) within or adjacent to the study area ......................... xix Table 2: Preliminary Impacts to Identified Cultural Heritage Resources and Recommended Mitigation Strategies ................................................................................................................................................... xxiii ASI Cultural Heritage Resource Assessment Lower Yonge Precinct City of Toronto, Ontario Page 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION ASI was contracted by MMM to conduct a Cultural Heritage Resource Assessment (CHRA) of the Lower Yonge
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Rapid Transit in Toronto Levyrapidtransit.Ca TABLE of CONTENTS
    The Neptis Foundation has collaborated with Edward J. Levy to publish this history of rapid transit proposals for the City of Toronto. Given Neptis’s focus on regional issues, we have supported Levy’s work because it demon- strates clearly that regional rapid transit cannot function eff ectively without a well-designed network at the core of the region. Toronto does not yet have such a network, as you will discover through the maps and historical photographs in this interactive web-book. We hope the material will contribute to ongoing debates on the need to create such a network. This web-book would not been produced without the vital eff orts of Philippa Campsie and Brent Gilliard, who have worked with Mr. Levy over two years to organize, edit, and present the volumes of text and illustrations. 1 Rapid Transit in Toronto levyrapidtransit.ca TABLE OF CONTENTS 6 INTRODUCTION 7 About this Book 9 Edward J. Levy 11 A Note from the Neptis Foundation 13 Author’s Note 16 Author’s Guiding Principle: The Need for a Network 18 Executive Summary 24 PART ONE: EARLY PLANNING FOR RAPID TRANSIT 1909 – 1945 CHAPTER 1: THE BEGINNING OF RAPID TRANSIT PLANNING IN TORONTO 25 1.0 Summary 26 1.1 The Story Begins 29 1.2 The First Subway Proposal 32 1.3 The Jacobs & Davies Report: Prescient but Premature 34 1.4 Putting the Proposal in Context CHAPTER 2: “The Rapid Transit System of the Future” and a Look Ahead, 1911 – 1913 36 2.0 Summary 37 2.1 The Evolving Vision, 1911 40 2.2 The Arnold Report: The Subway Alternative, 1912 44 2.3 Crossing the Valley CHAPTER 3: R.C.
    [Show full text]
  • SHS Newsletter – Jun 2016
    ANNUAL WALKING TOUR: Saturday, June 4th 2016 START TIME: 1:30 pm - The walk will start in Neil McClellan Park on the west side of Runnymede Road, across from the Runnymede subway station, and finish with refreshments at the Swansea Town Hall TOPIC: An Introduction to Swansea – Still a Community The Swansea Historical Society thankfully acknowledges funding grants from the following provincial bodies: President's Message by Bob Roden, President We have had a very eventful and exciting year, and I want to extend a sincere thank-you to all those who made it happen. The May 4 meeting was our last formal meeting before the summer break. We will start up again in October with our Annual General Meeting and elections, and we have a full slate of interesting speakers confirmed for the 2016-2017 programme year. In the meantime, we will be participating in several neighbourhood events, which we invite you to attend, including various guided historical walking tours. We hope to see you at our walking tours on June 4 and August 13, which will be led by Lance Gleich. Also, we plan to set up information tables at the Bloor West Village Sidewalk Sale on June 18 and the Montgomery's Inn Corn Roast & Heritage Fair on September 8, and we are seeking volunteers to take a shift at the SHS table for either one or both of those dates. See “Future Events” below, for more details on all of these happenings. Both Heritage Toronto (heritagetoronto.org/programs/tours) and the Royal Ontario Museum (www.rom.on.ca/en/whats-on/romwalks) offer guided walking tours throughout the season.
    [Show full text]
  • Brochure Spread Are People Seeninthis Hey You!Allthe
    Hey you, From the moment we set eyes on the kingxdufferin neighbourhood, we knew we were destined to be together. Initially attracted by the abundant parks, international cuisine, convenient transit, and fantastic entertainment – it was the wonderful sense of community that we really fell for. Love, XO Condos XO the spot. marks 1221 King St. 1221 W. xoxoxoxxoxoxxxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox oxoxoxooxoxoxooxoxoxooxxxxoxxxoxoxo xoxoxxoxoxoxoxoooxxoxoxoxoxxxxoooxoxo xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxoxoooxxoxoxoxoxooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox oxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox xoxoooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxoxoxoxoooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox oxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxxoooxooxxxoooxoxoxoxxoxoxoo xoxoxoxoooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox oxoxxxoooxooxxxoooxoxoxoxxoxoxoo just imagine... xoxoxoxxoxoxxxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox oxoxoxooxoxoxooxoxoxooxxxxoxxxoxoxo xoxoxxoxoxoxoxoooxxoxoxoxoxxxxoooxoxo xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxoxoooxxoxoxoxoxooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox oxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox xoxoooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxoxoxoxoooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox oxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxxoooxooxxxoooxoxoxoxxoxoxoo xoxoxoxoooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox oxoxxxoooxooxxxoooxoxoxoxxoxoxoo BLOOR ST. W DUNDAS ST. W LANDSDOWNE AVE. TRINITY BELLWOODS RONCESVALLES AVE. PARK 1.5 km HIGH PARK QUEEN WEST STANLEY 3.0 km RONCESVALLES 1.8 km PARK 1.25 km 1.7 km ST. JOSEPH’S QUEEN ST. W KING WEST HEALTH CENTRE 1.5 km 1.45 km PARKDALE DUFFERIN ST. KING ST. W 1.9 km SUNNYSIDE LIBERTY VILLAGE 1.50 km 750 m
    [Show full text]
  • [email protected] Hey You, from the Moment We Set Eyes on the Kingxdufferin Neighbourhood, We Knew We Were Destined to Be Together
    [email protected] Hey you, From the moment we set eyes on the kingxdufferin neighbourhood, we knew we were destined to be together. Initially attracted by the abundant parks, international cuisine, convenient transit, and fantastic entertainment – it was the wonderful sense of community that we really fell for. Love, XO Condos [email protected] XO the spot. marks 1221 King St. 1221 W. xoxoxoxxoxoxxxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox oxoxoxooxoxoxooxoxoxooxxxxoxxxoxoxo xoxoxxoxoxoxoxoooxxoxoxoxoxxxxoooxoxo xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxoxoooxxoxoxoxoxooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox oxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox xoxoooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxoxoxoxoooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox oxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxxoooxooxxxoooxoxoxoxxoxoxoo xoxoxoxoooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox oxoxxxoooxooxxxoooxoxoxoxxoxoxoo just imagine... xoxoxoxxoxoxxxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox oxoxoxooxoxoxooxoxoxooxxxxoxxxoxoxo xoxoxxoxoxoxoxoooxxoxoxoxoxxxxoooxoxo xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxoxoooxxoxoxoxoxooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox oxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox xoxoooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxoxoxoxoooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox oxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxxxoooxooxxxoooxoxoxoxxoxoxoo xoxoxoxoooxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxox oxoxxxoooxooxxxoooxoxoxoxxoxoxoo BLOOR ST. W DUNDAS ST. W LANDSDOWNE AVE. TRINITY BELLWOODS RONCESVALLES AVE. PARK 1.5 km HIGH PARK QUEEN WEST STANLEY 3.0 km RONCESVALLES 1.8 km PARK 1.25 km 1.7 km ST. JOSEPH’S QUEEN ST. W KING WEST HEALTH CENTRE 1.5 km 1.45 km PARKDALE DUFFERIN ST. KING ST. W 1.9
    [Show full text]
  • Comparing Gentrification in Parkdale, Toronto and Park Slope, NYC, 2003
    CNR Paper 11: April 2003 Comparing Gentrification in South Parkdale, Toronto and Lower Park Slope, New York City: A ‘North American’ Model of Neighbourhood Reinvestment? Tom Slater Comparing Gentrification in South Parkdale, Toronto and Lower Park Slope, New York City: A ‘North American’ Model of Neighbourhood Reinvestment? Dr Tom Slater April 2003 CONTENTS Abstract Page 2 Introduction: ‘Post-recession Gentrification’ and the Page 3 Resilience of Theoretical Divisions Discourses of Gentrification from Canada and the Page 8 United States South Parkdale, Toronto, Canada : From Page 21 Deinstitutionalization to Gentrification Lower Park Slope, New York City, USA: ‘Overspill’ Page 34 Gentrification and Organised Resistance Synthesis Page 44 Conclusion Page 49 Figure 1: South Parkdale, Toronto Page 57 Table 1: Manifesto of the Parkdale Pilot Project Page 58 (PPP) Figure 2: Lower Park Slope, New York City Page 59 Table 2: Indicators of Neighbourhood Change in Page 60 Lower Park Slope, 1980-2000 Table 3 - Ethnic Origin of Hispanic and Non- Page 61 Hispanic Residents in Lower Park Slope, 1980-2000 Criteria for Eligibility to Receive Help from Fifth Page 62 Avenue Committee Similarities and differences in the gentrification of Page 63 South Parkdale and Lower Park Slope References Page 64 CNR Paper 11 Acknowledgments Many thanks to Loretta Lees for her supervision of this research, to James DeFilippis for help with the New York section, to Elvin Wyly for his consistent encouragement and enthusiasm, and to Rowland Atkinson for his very careful reading of the first draft and constructive engagement with my arguments. My Toronto research was supported by a Leverhulme Trust Study Abroad Studentship.
    [Show full text]
  • Lease of the Palais Royale - Request for Proposals P-129-99.RFP (High Park)
    Lease of the Palais Royale - Request for Proposals P-129-99.RFP (High Park) (City Council on July 4, 5 and 6, 2000, adopted this Clause, without amendment.) The Economic Development and Parks Committee recommends the adoption of the following joint report (May 29, 2000) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism and the Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer: Purpose: To seek approval for the negotiation and execution of an agreement for the lease of the Palais Royale with the recommended proponent, Shoreline Entertainment Corporation. Financial Implications and Impact Statement: The City is currently covering all operating and maintenance costs for the Palais Royale building through the 2000 Facilities Operating Budget. Adoption of the recommendations included in this report will relieve the City of this expense, provide for an estimated investment of $2 million for restoration and rehabilitation of the building, general enhancement of the site, and will offer an income stream based on a percentage of sales over the term of the lease, with a minimum of $25,000.00 per year. This rent will begin to be fully realized in 2001 and will be reflected in the Parks and Recreation Operating Budget for next year. The Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer has reviewed this report and concurs with the financial impact statement. Recommendations: It is recommended that: (1) the proposal received from Shoreline Entertainment Corporation, the only acceptable proponent, in response to Request for Proposals P-129-99.RFP, for the lease of the Palais Royale, be accepted; (2) staff be authorized to negotiate and execute a lease agreement, in a form acceptable to the City Solicitor, with Shoreline Entertainment Corporation; and (3) the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Realm Strategy 2018-2023
    A PUBLIC REALM STRATEGY FOR TORONTO’S FINANCIAL DISTRICT 2018 – 2023 RAISING THE STANDARD TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Executive Summary and Key Recommendations 1 2 The Core of Opportunity and Success 3 3 Public Realm Investment to Support Economic Growth 5 4 A Resilient Financial District 8 5 Principles 10 6 Key Areas for Improvement 11 7 Distinct Characteristics of the Area 12 8 Operational Considerations of the Area 17 9 Public Realm Projects 20 Leveraging Planned and Scheduled Activity 21 Project Development 23 Time-specific Projects 23 Areawide Projects 23 Overview of Streets 24 Cloud Gardens Park 33 10 Applying the Highest Quality City Standards 34 Sidewalks 35 Trees 38 Lighting 39 Bicycle Parking 39 Street Furniture 41 Wayfinding 42 A District-wide Approach to Safety and Security 44 Additional Streetscape Elements 45 11 Public Works and Construction 47 12 Maintenance 47 13 Implementation 48 14 Acknowledgements 49 15 Board of Management and Staff 52 16 Works Cited and Photo Credits 53 17 Appendix A: Completed Public Realm Improvements 2013 – 2018 57 18 Appendix B: Project Development Checklist 59 19 Appendix C: Summary of Streetscape Recommendations 60 20 Appendix D: Recommended Streetscape Details 67 RAISING THE STANDARD B ABOUT THIS REPORT This strategy is a comprehensive update of the Toronto Financial District BIA’s original public realm strategy Raising the Standard that was completed in 2013. It summarizes the functional and aesthetic state of the public realm in the Financial District and highlights updated best practices and key areas for improvement. This update also includes an overview of public realm improvements completed to date, as well as an outline of future improvements based on the City of Toronto’s Five-Year Capital Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • I Remember Sunnyside (The Toronto Sketches Series) I Remember Sunnyside (The Toronto Sketches Series)
    (Download) I Remember Sunnyside (The Toronto Sketches Series) I Remember Sunnyside (The Toronto Sketches Series) n75s1vqsr I Remember Sunnyside (The Toronto Sketches Series) zuJw6BcF4 FA-24592 qktBRTlIC US/Data/History f2hR2cKUI 4.5/5 From 482 Reviews NxYZjJPcH Mike Filey qYj7KzEO7 audiobook | *ebooks | Download PDF | ePub | DOC 6qk8EBxfU 8QYpMkAhT h3JZzFfJv ihCkqF7iV eBPvK5Owt i7n3tLQbi UGS8QkWmT emCE3tny5 0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. Five StarsBy NorWesterHome IF0rpi2Cz town read.0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. Mike Filey had a 4yYZHrCHZ column in the Toronto Sun for about 30 years and I read it for many years (I fFLjk6ynS like learning about the history ofBy Teena in TorontoThere are a few things I wlYhOUtXK wish I could go back in time to experience and one of them is Sunnyside xDVUSMLIw Amusement Park, which is the focus of this book along with the a history of the 2Z2wBPiyn neighbourhood.Sunnyside Amusement Park was a popular amusement park in ug8N3ht7P Toronto that ran from 1922 to 1955. It was demolished in 1955 to make way for pw3RLXDIZ the building of the Gardiner Expressway. It was located on the Lake Ontario L3AfjRqum waterfront at the foot of Roncesvalles Avenue, west of downtown Toronto. Only PmXP0IfHu the Sunnyside Pool and Bathing Pavilion and the Palais Royale buildings 3koFQKRYo survive today.The park was popular for its large roller coaster, known as the UFLTeEizu "Flyer", several merry-go-rounds, the Derby Racer steeplechase ride and LxHufiLbP numerous smaller attractions. It also hosted several stunt events including SDG4KTCzD flagpole sitting, famous boat burnings in Lake Ontario and fireworks displays.
    [Show full text]
  • Competition to Develop Innovative Design Options
    COMPETITION BRIEF #2009-60 SUBMISSIONS DUE JUNE 25, 2010 COMPETITION TO DEVELOP INNOVATIVE DESIGN OPTIONS FOR THE GARDINER EXPRESSWAY AND LAKE SHORE BOULEVARD RECONFIGURATION ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT TORONTO, ONTARIO Waterfront Toronto 20 Bay Street, Suite 1310 Toronto, Ontario, M5J 2N8 Canada T 416.214.1344 waterfrontoronto.ca 1 COMPETITION BRIEF #2009-60 Competition to Develop Innovative Design Options for the Gardiner Expressway and Lake Shore Boulevard Reconfi guration Environmental Assessment COMPETITION BRIEF COMPETITION TO DEVELOP INNOVATIVE DESIGN OPTIONS FOR THE GARDINER EXPRESSWAY AND LAKE SHORE BOULEVARD RECONFIGURATION ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT TORONTO, CANADA CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 04 2 HISTORICAL OVERVIEW 06 3 GOALS OF THE COMPETITION 12 4 REQUIRED DESIGN ELEMENTS 13 5 SITE PROGRAM & PROPERTY OWNERSHIP 19 6 STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION 33 7 REVIEW AND SELECTION PROCESS 34 8 DELIVERABLES AND TIMETABLE 35 9 COMPETITION PROCESS TERMS AND CONDITIONS 37 10 LEGAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS 42 11 APPENDICES 48 Waterfront Toronto & City of Toronto 2 April 2010 View of the Gardiner Expressway and Lake Shore Boulevard Corridor looking west from the Don Roadway in Lower Don Lands. 3 COMPETITION BRIEF #2009-60 Competition to Develop Innovative Design Options for the Gardiner Expressway and Lake Shore Boulevard Reconfi guration Environmental Assessment 1 INTRODUCTION Waterfront Toronto (legally known as Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Each selected Proponent that submits a completed proposal will receive an Corporation) and the City of Toronto are seeking input from the world’s honorarium of CA$50,000, subject to conditions set out in this Competition most talented and creative design and engineering professionals in Brief. At the conclusion of the competition, Waterfront Toronto and the City developing bold new concepts for the future of the elevated Gardiner of Toronto may choose to retain one, more than one, or none of the fi rms or Expressway and Lake Shore Boulevard, including the adjacent lands.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Ontario Maritime Cultural Landscape
    LAKE ONTARIO MARITIME CULTURAL LANDSCAPE A Dissertation by BENJAMIN LOUIS FORD Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY August 2009 Major Subject: Anthropology LAKE ONTARIO MARITIME CULTURAL LANDSCAPE A Dissertation by BENJAMIN LOUIS FORD Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Approved by: Chair of Committee, Kevin Crisman Committee Members, Michael Alvard Donny Hamilton Jonathan Smith Head of Department, Donny Hamilton August 2009 Major Subject: Anthropology iii ABSTRACT Lake Ontario Maritime Cultural Landscape. (August 2009) Benjamin Louis Ford, B.A., University of Cincinnati; M.A., College of William and Mary Chair of Advisory Committee: Dr. Kevin Crisman The goal of the Lake Ontario Maritime Cultural Landscape project was to investigate the nature and distribution of archaeological sites along the northeast shoreline of Lake Ontario while examining the environmental, political, and cultural factors that influenced the position of these sites. The primary method of investigation was a combined archaeological and historical survey of the shoreline within seven 1-km square areas. The archaeological component of the survey covered both the terrestrial and submerged portions of the shore through marine remote sensing (side-scan sonar and magnetometer), diving surveys, pedestrian surveys, and informant interviews. A total of 39 sites and 51 isolated finds were identified or further analyzed as a result of this project. These sites ranged from the Middle Archaic period (ca. 5500–2500 B.C.) through the 19th century and included habitation, military, transportation, and recreational sites.
    [Show full text]
  • Intention to Designate Under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act - 295 Indian Road
    TE34.212b REPORT FOR ACTION Intention to Designate under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act - 295 Indian Road Date: July 13, 2018 To: City Council From: Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning Wards: Ward 14 - Parkdale-High Park SUMMARY This report recommends that City Council include the property at 295 Indian Road on the City of Toronto's Heritage Register and state its intention to designate the property under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act. Located on the east side of the street between Boustead and Radford avenues, south of Bloor Street West, the property at 295 Indian Road contains a 2½-storey detached house form building. The Paul Hahn House (1906) is valued as a fine representative example of Period Revival styling influenced by the Arts and Crafts Movement as designed by the notable Toronto practitioner, Eden Smith. In 2016, the owners of 295 Indian Road requested that their property be designated under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act as a significant example from the portfolio of the notable architect, Eden Smith. Following research and evaluation, it has been determined that the property at 295 Indian Road meets Ontario Regulation 9/06, the provincial criteria prescribed for municipal designation under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act for its design, associative and contextual value. The inclusion of the property at 295 Indian Road on the City's Heritage Register and its designation under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act would identify all of the property's cultural heritage value and heritage attributes.
    [Show full text]
  • REPORT for ACTION 1 Front Street West and 141 Bay Street - Official Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment Applications – Refusal Report
    ~TORONTO REPORT FOR ACTION 1 Front Street West and 141 Bay Street - Official Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment Applications – Refusal Report Date: April 10, 2019 To: Toronto and East York Community Council From: Director, Community Planning, Toronto and East York District Ward: 10 - Spadina-Fort York Planning Application Number: 18 199835 STE 28 OZ SUMMARY The applications propose to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law for the properties at 1 Front Street West and 141 Bay Street to permit two residential towers of 45 and 49 storeys (156.9 and 168.7 metres respectively) containing 836 units on top of the 5-storey heritage designated Dominion Public Building. The Dominion Public Building is proposed to be altered to accommodate 8,989 square metres of retail space and 22,045 square metres for a hotel with 251 rooms. A 3-level underground garage is proposed to accommodate 199 vehicular parking spaces. This report reviews and recommends refusal of the applications to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law as it does not support the role of the Financial District in maintaining office use on-site, does not provide minimum tall building setbacks, and does not conserve the scale, form and massing of the heritage Dominion Public Building. Specifically: • The proposal is inconsistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2014), as it sets out inappropriate development standards including the absence of maximum building densities for the subject site; elimination of building setbacks from property lines and reduced tower setbacks between buildings; the inadequate mix of land uses to meet long term needs; and has not conserved the significant heritage values of the Dominion Public Building, Union Station and the Union Station Heritage Conservation District; • The proposal fails to conform with the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2017).
    [Show full text]