TheBulletin.ca Journal of Downtown Toronto
Anthony Marcusa –
An anxious crowd gathered on June 10 at Daniels Spectrum in Regent Park for the first official public consultation between the city and concerned residents to discuss proposed amendments to the Regent Park redevelopment plan.
The proposal as made by the Toronto Community Housing Corporation (TCHC) looks to alter the existing bylaws for the area south from of Gerrard St. from Parliament to River, calling for taller buildings, amalgamated green space, the destruction of a heritage building, and a significant increase in population.
The TCHC presentation was interrupted frequently as residents bemoaned the changes, most notably the extension of building height on Parliament to a towering120 metres, with two buildings on Dundas St. E. topping out at 88 metres. At the northern end of River St., the current height limits of 22 and 30 metres will be increased to 50 metres.
Although the existing plan is nearly 10 years in the making, estimates now project units smaller in size and greater in number: 7500 as opposed to 5400. The community population would swell to 17 000 from 12 500.
“For anyone who has been coming to these meetings for a long time, the changes are almost unrecognizable,” said one long-term Gerrard and River resident.
“It’s the same problems: you’re looking at the boundaries of Regent Park as these hard black lines. There are people on the other side that you are not integrating,” he said, referring to the towers that will line the north side of the park.
A need for revenue is one factor contributing to a call for more units, that speaker continued. “The people who live outside Regent Park pay for the financial plans that you screwed up, and now you’re going to put height, traffic and density on top of us to cover the costs.”
“The neighbourhood cannot support this density, it is destructive to the surrounding community,” said a representative of the Aberdeen Avenue Residents Group, voicing their strong opposition to the changes. “[Gerrard and River] is miles to the closest subway, and transit is already packed in the mornings. This area is not walk-able to employment in the Downtown core,” he said to great applause, adding, “This is not city building, this is city destruction.”
“When you increase the magnitude of one part of something by a third, it’s potentially significant and structurally different,” echoed another man.
The proposal also includes the demolition of 14 Blevins Place, a mid-rise apartment building with heritage status that has been deemed too far gone for retrofitting. This part of the proposal met with support, even from the building’s current residents.
“My fire escape plan is incomplete, there are constant issues with piping, leaks, ventilation, and unsafe elevators,” said one mother.
Concerns were also raised about noise from the community energy centre, and about the vagueness of details about new affordable housing units.
Rent geared to income housing, affordable housing, and subsidized housing figures are not described specifically but are said to be 25% of total units.
