Toronto
The top 10 unbuilt projects in Toronto
The top 10 unbuilt projects in Toronto is something of a companion to my post about the top 10 buildings lost to demolition. Each offers a glimpse of how Toronto might look if, as the saying goes, things turned out differently. Unlike the prior post, however, not all of these projects are mourned. Perhaps the most notorious entry on this list, the Spadina Expressway, is still generally loathed to this day (as was evidenced by the reaction to Rocco Rossi's proposed Toronto Tunnel). In fact, a list of this type can't but be defined by a certain ambiguity. As fascinating as it is to peruse the proposed developments, even a brief a critical consideration of each reveals that most fizzled for good reason.
Still, it's always intriguing to look back and think about what might have been.
Spadina Expressway
Proposed: 1949
Fizzled: 1971
Why it wasn't meant to be: Although a portion did get built between Wilson Heights and Eglinton Avenue (Allen Road), urban theorists and activists, including Jane Jacobs, fiercely opposed the plan. It initially appeared as though their efforts to kill the expressway were in vain, but with the election of Bill Davis as Ontario Premier in 1971, fate shifted and the project was dead.
Ballet Opera
Proposed: 1984
Fizzled: 1990
Why it wasn't meant to be: Now the site of condos, Bay and Wellesley was almost home to Toronto's Opera House. Designed, if not built, by Moshe Safdie, the proposed building was would have been iconic, to say the least. But, despite securing both the land and a $65-millon building grant from the province in 1988, when Bob Rae and the New democrats took power in 1990, the funding was cut and the project died when the Ballet-Opera House board balked at building a less expensive structure.
Eaton Centre Towers
Proposed: 1965
Fizzled: 1967
Why it wasn't meant to be: In 1966 city council had approved Eaton's plans to develop a massive retail centre around Queen and Bay that would see the demolition of all but the clock tower of Old City Hall (later in negotiations that too was slated to go), but the City and Eaton's could never come to terms on the cost/value of the site, which led the latter to pull the plug on the project rather unexpectedly.
Eglinton West Subway Line
Proposed: 1994
Fizzled: 1995
Why it wasn't meant to be: Although work began on Allen Station (which would have existed below Eglinton West) in 1994, when Mike Harris took over from Bob Rae as premier of Ontario in 1995, the project was terminated. The current plan for public transportation along Eglinton is the Crosstown LRT.
Harbour City
Proposed: 1968
Fizzled: 1972
Why it wasn't meant to be: Harbour City would have been just that -- a canal-style city out in the harbour attached to the mainland by ring road with entrance/exits at Bathurst and Strachan. Although the project had its high-profile proponents -- including Jane Jacobs who once said that it was "probably the most important advance in planning for cities that has been made this century" -- ultimately concerns over the the environmental impact of the development led to its demise.
Project Toronto
Proposed: 1968
Fizzled: 1968
Why it wasn't meant to be: Project Toronto never really got beyond the theoretical phase, but Buckminster Fuller's plan to build a waterfront university that would feature a 20-storey pyramid and "Pro-To-Cities" built in the inner harbour, would have profoundly changed this city's downtown core and its relationship with the waterfront. With plans for Metro Centre arising at the same time, Project Toronto never really went anywhere.
Metro Centre
Proposed: 1968
Fizzled: 1975
Why it wasn't meant to be: Metro Centre was, bar none, the biggest project that never came to be in Toronto. Had it been completed, Union Station would have been demolished, the CBC would have got a huge broadcasting tower, the YUS Subway line would have been extended to Queen's Quay, and basically very little would look the same in the far downtown core. Although there are a plethora of reasons Metro Centre never came to be, chief among them was the recommendation by a joint committee from the provincial and municipal governments to retain Union Station, which led the railway companies behind the development (CN and CP) to pull out.
Queen Street Subway
Proposed: 1942
Fizzled: 1980 (but there's always the DRL)
Why it wasn't meant to be: The Queen Street Subway came very close to happening on more than one occasion, but was eventually killed when it became clear that passenger demand was greater to the north.
Cambrai Avenue and Vimy Circle
Proposed: 1911
Fizzled: 1930
Why it wasn't meant to be: Part of larger plans to ease traffic congestion and alter the street map of Toronto, both Vimy Circle and Cambrai (once set to called Federal) Avenue would have given Toronto two magnificent boulevards, but ultimately Torontonians killed the projects, which were part of a question on the municipal ballot in 1930. Shortly after the stock market crash of 1929, citizens voted narrowly against the City going into debt to finance the road improvements.
Island Tunnel
Proposed: 1935
Fizzled: It hasn't really
Why it wasn't meant to be: Believe it or not, the first plan to build a tunnel to the Island was hatched in 1935 -- not only that, they actually started building the thing. With federal funds secured for the project, it looked like a go, until -- you guessed it -- a changed in power. When William Lyon Mackenzie King took office, the project was almost immediately scrapped. But that hasn't stopped it from hanging around.
Images from the Toronto Archives, York University, Zeidler Partnership Architects, and Duke 360 on Flickr.
Mark Osbaldeston's Unbuilt Toronto was, obviously, very helpful in putting this post together, though credit should also go to David Kopulos and his site Toronto Pending.
Discussion
92 Comments
Sort By Oldest First / Newest First
Subscribe
There is a reason why many American cities lament their in-city freeways, and in some cases are dismantling them (San Francisco, Seattle) or burying them (Boston, Seattle). They're neighbourhood lifesuckers, pollution beasts, ugly, benefit only the suburban residents (who are trying to get into the city), and make living in a city terrible. Transit is a better option, as are people+car+bike-friendly boulevards (which unfortunately Toronto doesn't have).
Because Los Angeles is the model city the world should aspire to, right?
The Bay and Wellesley Opera House look interesting as well.
But as a corollary to the demolished buildings thread, this is interesting, featuring several projects that would have involved terrible demolitions had they gone ahead. It could've been worse.
I love all these old photos of planners standing around tabletop models.
Never see another highway? Maybe.
Never see another subway line? That's silly.
NIMBY? Not hardly, and not at all in my book. More like <i>informed</i> and <i>intelligent</i> citizens being concerned for how their city is-something that we need in the last election, and what we didn't get from the <i>uninformed</i> and <i>unintelligent</i> people who voted in Rob Ford.
As for the killing of the expressways, the city would've been anything but liveable. The Gardiner is a great example of why it doesn't work - it's been at capacity since the 1970s, yet the Yonge line has only begun to reach capacity within the last few years (while the other lines still have a good amount open). A great example of the reversal of the mentality in the States is Portland, Oregon, where they got money to build a freeway but instead built an LRT that has worked wonders for the area. There are other US cities where freeways are being ripped out.
http://www.emporis.com/application/?nav=building&;lng=3&id=eatonsjohnmaryontower-toronto-canada
Yeah, we know, we've heard it before. The argument is tired. Let's just let the city wither until a future government is forced to bulldoze Danforth or Dufferin to finally make room for the million or so cars that will be added in the next 20 years.
Derek, you forgot to mention that one specific element of Metro Centre was indeed built -- the broadcast tower!
Also, why the hell did the TTC not think about adding a third rail or two lines on each side of the subway line. I understand space issues but anyone ever hear about rapid service? Wouldn't that be great if you had a rapid train from Finch to Union which only stopped at 3-5 stops?
How about forgetting subways because they are too costly. Go with LRT.
I'm getting frustrated.
What isn't mentioned here is that the condos in front of the Harbour Castle hotel were really only the first two towers in a complex that would have had something like 20 of them, going from Yonge to Bathurst, complementing Metro Centre and the Safdie project to form a city-within-a-city.
Toronto has one of the best oppourtunities to revitalize our waterfront. I for one would like to see it done right so that we may have something special on, and just off our shores.
Also, the John Maryon tower would've been a pretty big deal.
There's also the Sapphire Tower condo, 45 Bay St (which I really really hope happens someday), (another) BCE Place III/Bay-Wellington tower, the old 1 Bloor East, Metro Centre/the original plans for CN & Union Station (that called for it's construction), Ripley's Aqaurium (who knows if that is still happenning..), Calatrava's original plan for Ryerson's George Vari Centre for Computing and Engineering building, another Calatrava design for a Toronto Island Airport bridge, Spadina Hotel (maybe just a myth?), World Trade Centre Toronto (I don't knowe if this one is real), Weston Hotel, beautiful CN Royel Trust headquarters, University Ave Theatre & Hotel, and I think there's some more that I can't remember.
@ Larry: really, the DVP permanently broke up St. Clair? I don't suppose it actually had anything to do with THE DON VALLEY itself? But, yes, you have highlighted one of the biggest issues with the city and that is the fact that there was zero planning at the turn of the last century, so many streets do wild gyrations or just end. To name a few: Davenport, Dundas in any direction, Kingston Rd., Avenue Rd., King St at River and Ronscesvales... the list is endless. Even Carlton/College never joined and it was only the clout of the Eaton family that got that disaster-in-waiting repaired.
@ The Shakes - so, who do you think is jamming up the DVP and Gardiner on a Saturday, both directions? If you actually went anywhere out of the core, you'd know that both those routes are jammed ALL DAY on the weekends. Hell, Christmas day I get stuck in traffic coming back from my sister's in Pickering. Based on the buildings I manage, cars are not going away and many monied folk are seriously worried about where the hell things will be in another 5,10 years.
@ Peanut Gallery. Sorry, I just couldn't stop laughing when I read your post. The Gardiner was built to get traffic OUT of Parkdale. Citizens were growing increasingly concerned that traffic was choking their streets and they demanded action. Which route do you think I take now because the Jameson on-ramp is closed? King St to Queensway. It's marginally better than Lakeshore Blvd at this juncture. My alternate route to my previous job at Pharmacy/Eglinton when the DVP was useless? Glenn Rd to Bayview, or O'Connor.
These are the options that have been forced upon us because of shi$tty planning 100 years ago.
[Beating a dead horse] Toronto is the only sizable city of the dozens I have travelled to that is WITHOUT a network of 6 or 8 lane arterial roads. Vancouver has them. Calgary has them. SF has them. Paris and London have them.
Until the peanut gallery accepts that FACT, this city is circling the drain. The 'build more highways and they will use them' mantra is total BS: just another lame slogan from the tree huggers or the unemployed to justify letting arteriosclerosis bring this city to its knees.
And i just wanted to correct one of your points, with only a few exceptions, the monied folk actually live in the core (i.e. proximity to where the subway lines run).
From a Torontonian perspective I'm not uprooting my entire [family's] life because <i>I</i> change jobs. Not everyone lives in a tiny apartment by themselves.
Not everyone works in an office and not everyone who drives lives in the suburbs.
Your "infrastructure of the future" won't change shit.
Also, if you think broadbrand is going to improve and be affordable you obviously haven't been keeping up with any of the recent news involving the CRTC (civilian regulatory board almost exclusively staffed by ex-telcom-execs)
Also, I'm not talking about tearing down the DVP, i'm saying lets not build new ones. If DVP, Gardiner and 427 never existed to begin with, we wouldn't have the sprawl and traffic problems that exist today.
Yes i know not everyone works in an office and not everyone who drives lives in the suburbs. Just like not everyone who lives downtown lives alone in an apartment. What i'm talking about is percentages, if 20-30% of people could stop commuting, or only had to commute 3 days instead of 5, you seriously don't think that would make a difference? Are you fucking serious?
And regarding broadband prices, i bet you my internet costs are lower than your car costs. And i bet you it would be a lot cheaper to make internet free for the 80% of the population that works in service industries than it is to build a brand new 8 lane highway through Canada's largest city.
You mentioned Avenue, which is a similar situation: it now ends just north of the 401, but it previously connected with Yonge in that area. The alignment was erased by the 401.
Davenport follows an old trail that isn't related to the later grid.
What's interesting, though, is that a lot of discontinuous streets were built that way to begin with, presumably with the idea of joining them up some time in the future: streets like Markham Rd and Huron St used to have discrete sections north of St Clair, but instead of finally being connected they were simply renamed.
I don't move my family cause I found a nice job in the suburbs, not to mention if my wife has a job and my kids go to school in completely different districts.
Traffic is the last thing I base my life, family and career on.
My commute is just fine btw.
I don't know any corporate office type employer who would allow all their employees to work from home more than they do now. And it's not because the connection sucks. Are <i>you</i> fucking joking?
That your internet costs less than a car is great, and a useless fact. They're not, or will ever be, mutually exclusive.
<I>"Also, if you think broadbrand is going to improve and be affordable you obviously haven't been keeping up with any of the recent news involving the CRTC (civilian regulatory board almost exclusively staffed by ex-telcom-execs)"<I/>
And now you're saying it isn't:
<I>"And it's not because the connection sucks. Are you fucking joking?"<I?>
Anyhow, if you're happy with your commute and life that's fan-fucking-tastic for you. For the others who rot on highways day in and day out, the answer is not another fucking freeway through our city, the answer is elsewhere. Look at your life choices and alternatives first.
Nice comprehension skills.
You keep enjoying your commute, OK?
London and Paris and SF all have 6-8 lane arterials, but they are few and far between, and they function as highways. And guess what? Toronto has the 400-series highways, all of which are 6-8 lane (or more) arterials.
You are wrong so thoroughly and consistently it's incredible.
This is how you're going out? A 30 second read of my comments above would show your full of shit.
The main point which you TOTALLY FUCKING COMPLETELY MISSED is, that it is better to spend money over the next 20 years to improve telecommuting vs physically commuting and to look for alternatives:
I say we all make choices about where we live work and shop. You say some patently stupid shit about why YOU'VE CHOSEN to commute, and then act like YOU had no control in those CHOICES.
You say internet will alwys be too expensive and shitty (which you later retracted) for telecommuting to ever progress beyond where it is now, becaus eof some stupid CRTC shit that pulled out of your ass. I say bullshit telecommuting costs less than physically commuting hands down. This clearly went over your head, instead you dismissed it as useless and wanted to argue some patently stupid shit about mutual exclusivity. Guess what shit-tard no one is saying you must give up your car to have internet, or you must give up your internet to have a car. We're talking about in the context of telecommuting vs physically commuting, you know the main point which again YOU TOTALLY COMPLETELY FUCKING MISSED.
Anyhow i'm done owning you, cause the 30 second read of your posts reveals how utterly hopeless it is to make you any less stupid.
Telecommuting is not going to be an option, developed infrastructure or not; you can ask any CEO or HR specialist why since I could say the earth is round and you wouldn't believe it.
You need to calm down and untwist your panties princess as your anger is obviously getting to you.
I didn't even make any semantic arguments aside from the fact you misinterpreted my statements about the current state of internet infrastructure (my bad, I don't write in a way that panders to the simple).
I can only imagine you frothing at the mouth typing, and it makes me chuckle to see how much you refuse to accept you're wrong.
"Toronto is the only sizable city of the dozens I have travelled to that is WITHOUT a network of 6 or 8 lane arterial roads. Vancouver has them. Calgary has them. SF has them. Paris and London have them.
Until the peanut gallery accepts that FACT, this city is circling the drain. The 'build more highways and they will use them' mantra is total BS: just another lame slogan from the tree huggers or the unemployed to justify letting arteriosclerosis bring this city to its knees."
Here's the problem - you can't build a highway network now: the city is too developed. The cost of building one is prohibitively expensive because any route would require acquiring private property and demolishing buildings - which is expensive anywhere, but downtown would be astronomical.
This is another pipe-dream of yours, that will never see the light of day, primarily because it's based in fantasy.
On the other hand, a combination Transit City-Downtown relief line-Go Transit improvements would do the job, and is entirely feasible.
And here's a key difference between highway networks vs. transit networks: transit networks always end up spurring investment (and thus, enlarging the property tax base) whereas highway networks always depress local property values, thus decreasing property tax bases. ie - the Bronx-Queens Expressway in NYC turned one of the more vibrant areas in the city outside Manhattan into one of it's poorest . . . But it did help rich folks in Connecticut get home from the office quicker without having to ride a train . . .
But I digress - enlighten me as to where you'd put this highway network, because you can talk about it all you want, but it's pretty clear you don't have any idea on how to implement it.
Oh, and nice touch on the name-calling, that's always classy and makes you seem incredibly intelligent.
That is, suburbaners need a subway expansion to their area, be cause lets face it - a majority of the cars is from them.
But the fact that downtowners still rely on cars so much is unacceptable.
They should'nt have it easy - they are getting a 'Get Out of Jail Free' card by Ford's election.
Our money needs to stop being spent on roads and highways, and instead we need Road Tolls, improved subways, and more bike lanes.
Development needs to happen on more empty lots to discourage downtown parking, except in densely populated areas.
Instead of a Queen St. subway, we need a King or even more southern subway - why don't we put it on the Gardiner, even?
Cars are not benefitting the city in any way, let's make our air clean and lessen the car count.
Christy Pitts riots? You are so far off topic, you should join Edwin in the Drive section of the G&M. Nobody said Toronto was a paradise in the '50s, but my mother went to Rexdale High and there were no police or patt downs. We had no head lice or bed bugs when I went to public school in Vancouver and Toronto, so yes - this city is circling the drain.
As usual, the internet is pandering to polarized opposites who are shouting at one and other and clearly not even reading the other's posts.
Toronto is 2.5 MILLION people. NYC and London, to name 2 cities that the usual suspects love to throw up every time their favorite commuter story is to be bandied around, passed that population over 100 years ago. If we have L.A.'s traffic problems NOW (Google the 401: it's the busiest hwy in North America, then ask yourself WHY), WTF will we be doing in 20 years when the 416 hits 3.5 million and the GTA is 6 or 7 million?
The earlier remarks about Calgary are just silly. As a city hits 1 million, it must begin asking itself where it wants to put its first subway. Before that, there is no density and no tax base to even consider it. Vancouver has 7 arterial roads out of the core that are 6 or 8 lanes. Toronto has 3 - 4 if you count Avenue Rd. which is actually a mess north of St. Clair anyway.
People who hate cars will see a boogey man under every chassis. Look at how property values shot up along the 404 as it extended north. Who is buying up all the land in north Brampton and north of Newmarket now, betting on where the 404 and 410 will end up?
I am not anti-transit, but the TTC is a sinkhole: the city loses money on every ticket it sells. The Province makes $600M on gasoline tax, and while the city pays only $300M to maintain our crappy roads, it collects more than that in green P parking and traffic tickets, for those literate enough to read a F/S.
SHAKES: you must be in grade 8, or work for a union if you think we actually make choices where we live. I could recount a thousand stories where people's lives have been uprooted, either by a job closing, career change, marriage ending, marriage beginning. From the time you collect your first student welfare check, to the day the city pays to bury you in a plot, there are 70 years of possibilities. I suppose the guy on here from Calgary PLANNED his move here...?
My major point is, for those who even give a sh$t about this city, is that if we are having these epic troubles now, at a piddly 2.5M, we are absolutely doomed. Most cities passed that point a century ago and were able to bulldoze and plan when labour was cheap and safety laws non-existent. To get any major project done today, whether highway expansion (the Gardiner: inevitable) to the Eglinton subway (also inevitable), costs 5Xs as much as it once did. Opportunities lost.
JB, you're just another sphincter with an opinion. Lots of cities have faced these choices and bulldozed away. Sao Paulo is one of my favorites (I visit there often) and when they were faced with an epic traffic nightmare in the '50s, they bulldozed an entire 15 km stretch of the core (Avenida Paulista), mowing down gorgeous coffee baron mansions in the process, to make room for a massive subway project and 8 lane avenue. Without it, the city would have become, well, Mexico City.
Toronto is 2.5 million. Period. Even generously including the Oshawa to Hamilton corridor, you'd optimistically climb to 4.5 million, maybe 5. Including Windsor, Buffalo to Kingston is disingenous, at best.
I worked in Scarborough for a decade, and was contentedly planning on buying a condo at Scarborough Town Center, when afer 55 years the company I worked for suddenly closed their doors. To my surprise, I found myself working at Islington/Bloor.
How does one put down roots and plan for that?
Choices? Planning? Not since our grandparents time, my friend.
My point is this. The vast majority of people who live in 905 own their home and commute to work by car. Living in 905 was a conscious decision that they had full control over. Maybe they couldn't live without an ensuite, maybe they had a hard on for a family room, maybe they think their kid needs a yard or maybe Greenpark's pictures were too hard to resist. Whatever their reasons, this was a CHOICE they made. If they don't like the downside of it (i.e. long commutes), then they should start thinking about what they'd be willing to give up to improve it.
Grow up and stop the name-calling.
"Nobody said Toronto was a paradise in the '50s, but my mother went to Rexdale High and there were no police or patt downs. We had no head lice or bed bugs when I went to public school in Vancouver and Toronto, so yes - this city is circling the drain."
Circling the drain? We consistently rank in the top 20 in most major studies on livability, we're a top 10 financial centre, and we're circling the drain?
If immigration=a deteriorating city, than surely the Canadian cities with the lowest immigration rates, wouldn't also rank the lowest within Canada for livability, right?
We've got issues that need to be dealt with, but this "Toronto is Detroit!" narrative is completely irrational.
Please point to a city of similar size that's doing better than us, given this financial crisis.
And once again - you dodged the question:
"WHERE ARE YOU GOING TO BUILD THE HIGHWAY/ROAD NETWORK THAT YOU ARE CONSTANTLY CHAMPIONING?"
"People who hate cars will see a boogey man under every chassis. Look at how property values shot up along the 404 as it extended north. Who is buying up all the land in north Brampton and north of Newmarket now, betting on where the 404 and 410 will end up?"
And yet, tearing up established neighourhoods in dense urban areas and placing highway road networks in middle of them always has a negative effect on property values. You're essentially asking folks living in Toronto to destroy their neighbourhoods so that people in the 905 can get to work quicker. That's why most of us scoff at building highway networks, that and there's no place to put them, and we can't afford them.
"I am not anti-transit, but the TTC is a sinkhole: the city loses money on every ticket it sells."
Most transit system loose money, but it's a city-wide, economy-wide investment to build transit. You're probably completely unfamiliar with the fact that well-planned transit investment is one of the sure-fire ways to stimulate the economy. Build a subway where there is demand for it - and you'll get 3 times the cost of the line in private investment around the subway stations.
Portland found this with their LRT network.
I just don't see any practical alternative to a Transit City/DRL/Go Expansion
Maybe I'll 'shove off' later.
Second, as an obsessee, and resident of St. Clair West, I am definitely looking into an 'original through-Valley routing'
Finally, the original topic of conversation has largely been ignored in the later posts, so as a return-to-form:
The Bay/Wellesley opera house would have been astounding, as would Vimy Circle. Despite the inferred name change to Yonge-Vimy/Federal-Spadina/Allen-University Heights-Jane line.
Much *more* love.
Check out their 3-D walkthrough rendering at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8qKGC4EToA
If only Toronto had this!
Rob Ford believes that trees belong in parks not streets. He would also love to triple car use by the end of his term. Inspiring leader indeed, I wish he would run for PM!!!
Delta City was meant to be a neocon nightmare of a completely privatized city, with no mayor or elected council, but a CEO/manager in charge; with no voting, but stock options ('Anybody can buy a piece of OCP stock'-The Old Man) as if that will solve problems or stand in for the democracy that's lost; sterile, soulless towers that serve as housing; crappy shopping malls and chain stores in place of independent businesses, multiplexes in place of movie theaters, and worst of all, no local culture (no theaters or theater companies, just musicals, dance and art-all sponsored by the corporation in charge [OCP or whatever big company that built Delta City/Gamma City/Whatever City.]) Worst of all, corporate education/schools most likely consisting of a system of TV sets similar to the infamous <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_One_News";>Channel One</a> network that's sadly a part of so many American schools. Even worse than that would be the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RoboCop_3";>relocation of all of the city's poor or homeless by force just to house those who the corporation in question deems 'worthy'</a> to live in the new city. Is that what you want? A future where cyborg police patrol the streets crushing all resistance and throwing out the homeless/'unworthy'? Well, I don't, and I don't want Toronto to be another Delta City (even though with all of the condos going up it sure feels like it's becoming Delta City!)
Ever been to Detroit?
for the nice data you will have here on this post.
I will likely be coming again to your blog for extra soon.