Daily insights for city builders, delivered every morning at 6 AM ET. I’m Brandon Donnelly — a Toronto-based real estate developer and founder of Globizen. I’ve been writing here since 2013.
Art and culture are powerful tools for city building. Pictured here is a laneway in downtown Detroit that is known as “The Belt.” It is called this because of its location in the city’s former garment district, but today, it has been redefined as a cultural alley. In it, and deep within unmarked basements, you’ll find venues like Deluxx Fluxx, which call themselves a nightclub art house. (You’re going to want to click through to their website and get a feel for the place.)
This alley isn’t brand new. It was conceptualized by the art gallery Library Street Collective a few years after it was founded in 2012. But I think it remains an excellent example of at least two things. One, Detroit is cool. It really has been going through a cultural renaissance. (You should also know that Detroit is the birthplace of techno.) And two, The Belt remains a perfect example of what is possible with our underutilized urban spaces.
Virtually every city has alleys exactly like this one. But too few are doing something as cool with them.
I am not a transportation engineer, but sometimes I like to, you know, pretend. And lately, I’ve been thinking about how to better design the Toronto intersection of Dundas, Dupont, Annette, and Old Weston (which I touched on briefly over here). It’s a weird 5-point intersection that is often cited as one of the most confusing in the city. And so there’s a lot that could be done.
Here’s what it looks like today:
The centerpiece is the Dundas-Dupont Traffic Island, which is actually a city-owned park. It’s not the most generous green space, but the real problem with this park is that it’s very much an island. There’s really only one pedestrian access point — its north end. For the most part, you need to be unlawful in your movements on and off it.
This is a fairly common occurrence in cities. The island is, almost certainly, a remnant space. It was never explicitly designed; it is just what was left over after they figured out how to connect all of these streets and negotiate the intersection’s grade changes.
The other signal, that these are remnant spaces, is the paint markings on the street. Their main job is to tell cars where to go. But they’re also unproductive spaces. Nobody is intended to actually occupy them. So what they really say is, “we have too much road and we didn’t know what to do; so we just painted them.”
If you watch the below video of Claire Weisz (founder of WXY Studio) explaining the work that she has done in New York City, you’ll see remarkable similarities to what I’m talking about here. This sort of thing happens all the time, especially at messy intersections where multiple streets converge. The objective was to connect the streets and the rest became a byproduct.
But when properly designed, these spaces actually become better for everyone: drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians. And this Toronto intersection strikes me as a perfect candidate. So if my local Councillor Gord Perks is reading this post, I would ask him to do what he can within the city to encourage this kind of positive change.
And not just here, but wherever there is a street that sucks.
This is a photo taken from the base village of Val Thorens. I took it while we were sitting on a massive terrace in the middle of it. But what stood out to me even more than the terrace itself was the buildings that frame it. They are all about 8-9 storeys, have no step-backs, and were clearly orchestrated to create a defined “street wall.”
These framing buildings can be just as important as the public spaces themselves; they form the “walls” of the public realm and create a sense of enclosure. In this case, the buildings also follow a similar aesthetic. They were designed to pay homage to traditional Savoyard architecture, which is known for its use of local woods and stones.
The other thing I find noteworthy is that all of this is only about 50-some years old. Val Thorens the resort opened in 1971. And it only became an idea sometime around 1969 when Pierre Schneblelen — an engineer and developer — decided that he wanted to build Europe’s highest ski resort. (The base of the resort sits at 2,300 m and the peak elevation is 3,230 m.)
As time passes, it’s easy to take these kinds of places and experiences for granted. But they only exist because someone, at some point, had a vision. And when that vision was initially presented, it was probably perceived by many, or by most, to be crazy. That’s just how these things go, and so I like reminding myself of that.
Let’s resume looking at sidewalks and public spaces.
If you look in the City of Toronto’s Official Plan for the stretch of Dundas Street West that runs between Dupont Street and Bloor Street West, you’ll find a map that looks like this:
Red signifies “Mixed Use.” And so if you were to just look at this map, you might naturally assume that, in the real world, this is a continuous main street that connects The Junction neighborhood down to Bloor. But that’s not actually the case. Instead, it looks like this:
Because of the rail corridor on the east side, it is a single-sided street. And generally speaking, these don’t make for the best retail streets. But it also has narrow sidewalks and a compromised public realm. If you go back to the map I shared yesterday, you get this:
I don’t think 30cm is entirely accurate here, but that’s beside the point. What matters is that this is just one of many examples in the city of a discontinuous public realm. (Here’s another, undignified example, from Parkside Drive.)
Over the years, there have been a number of design concepts proposed. Below is one by Brown + Storey Architects that was done I don’t know how many years ago. Their proposal widened the sidewalks along this stretch, and added bike lanes. They also proposed a roundabout at the intersection of Dundas, Dupont, and Annette, which is another matter that needs addressing.
But none of this has been implemented and I don’t know of any plans to do it. When we were going through the rezoning process for Junction House, we were made aware of some transportation studies that had been done for the above intersection. But that’s about it. There wasn’t an actual ETA.
However, now that my commute consists of walking up and down this part of Dundas, I’ve been thinking more about how it could be improved.
I think there’s no question that the sidewalks need to be widened. It would also be helpful if there were crosswalks to facilitate getting off the south end of this exotic island:
But equally important, I think that something should be done about the single-sided nature of the street. Given that there’s limited width, my mind immediately goes to shipping containers, or something similar, to start activating the east side of the street.
This has already been done further south on Dundas (east of Bathurst):
And it could work here too. Already there’s a Blondie’s Pizza anchoring the south end of this stretch (really fantastic pizza, by the way):
But I would love to hear your ideas, as I’m currently in the market. I also don’t think that you necessarily need to be from Toronto in order to comment. Great streets are great streets. So if it were up to you, what would you change, if anything, about this part of Dundas Street West? Let me know in the comment section below.
Today is a travel day, so I don’t have a whole lot to say. But BlogTO did just publish a story about our Junction placemaking sign: “This intersection is set to become Toronto’s next best photo-op.” I am also happy to report that the sign’s timer has now been installed, which means that, starting today, it will get illuminated each night from sunset to 11PM. (We’re required to shut it off at this time because, you know.)
So far the response has been overwhelmingly positive. And I truly hope that this installation will become a symbol for the Junction neighborhood. This was our sole purpose for pursuing it. It would also be ironic if something that was so difficult to get approval for ends up being loved by city. Perhaps it’s a lesson that stubbornness can be a good thing when you believe in something.
I am so impressed by The Well. I walked through it this afternoon after a meeting at BDP Quadrangle’s office, and I think that once it’s fully open and stabilized, it’s going to become an instant icon and destination in the city of Toronto. So much so that when people visit Toronto, they’re going to come to The Well to take a photo under its glass canopy. Just watch.
Right now, only a portion of it is accessible to the public and it’s because there’s a BMO bank branch on the lower level that is open and operating. It’s all by itself right now, though, so if you bank with BMO, maybe pop by and say hello.
Now, if you’re a naysayer, I would imagine you’re probably thinking at least two things. You’re thinking of the office space that Shopify left behind. And you’re thinking that open-air malls maybe aren’t well suited towards the Toronto climate. When our group walked through it today, Matt Young (of Republic Developments) immediately said that it felt like something from California.
I don’t really get this climate argument though. Mainly for two reasons: (1) because winter clothes exist and (2) because we have lots of other open-air malls throughout the city that are doing just fine. Except we don’t call them open-air malls, we just call them streets. And the way they work is that people walk outside, and then go into various retail establishments.
Congratulations to everyone involved in The Well. It is an accomplishment that you should all be very proud of, and our city is better for it. I look forward to seeing it continue to take shape.
New York City Mayor Eric Adams today appointed Ya-Ting Liu as the city’s first-ever chief public realm officer, delivering on a key promise from his State of the City address. In this newly created role, Liu will coordinate across city government, community organizations, and the private sector to create extraordinary public spaces across the entire city and continue to drive the city’s economic recovery.
As chief public realm officer, Liu will focus on delivering two components of Mayor Adams’ “Working People’s Agenda.” She will execute on a plan to invest $375 million to create and expand high-quality public spaces in all five boroughs, which includes the Broadway Vision plan, a full reconstruction of Jamaica Avenue from Sutphin Boulevard to Merrick Boulevard, and permanent upgrades to Open Streets in the Bronx and on Staten Island. At the same time, she will lead the administration’s work to deliver a permanent outdoor dining program in partnership with the City Council that works for businesses and residents, building on the massive success of the pandemic-era temporary Open Restaurants program, with clear design guidelines and accessible tools for restaurant owners and communities.
When done right, public spaces have been proven to promote economic development. Perhaps the most obvious example in New York is the High Line. The first two phases cost around $153 million to construct, and as of 2014 it was already attracting some 5 million visitors a year and thought to be responsible for over $2 billion of economic activity. As of 2019, the number of annual visitors had increased to 8 million.
So if New York ends up with more of these spaces — you know, enjoyable spaces that attract lots of humans and investment — this could be a good idea.
This compare-and-contrast tweet between Toronto’s High Park and New York’s Central Park was not meant to suggest that New York is a perfect comparable to appropriate (Toronto is not New York), or that foliage isn’t important in our urban environments. Instead, it was meant to highlight that:
The towers north of High Park (and north of Bloor Street) could almost certainly never be built in today’s planning environment. The recently built point towers exist because the slab towers were already there.
This condition of height/density tucked and setback off of main streets is something that you will find across Toronto, as well as in a number of other cities.
Sometimes it can be rightly argued that this is being done in order to preserve a fine-grained and pedestrian-scaled public realm, which is important. But in other cases, like the one above, it feels like a clear reluctance to accept big-city status and any sort of urban grandeur. Are we still trying to be a Victorian city?
Equally important in the design of public spaces are the edges and “walls” that frame it. And High Park’s edges need work. Why is there almost nowhere to go and hang out on the main edge of Toronto’s principal urban park? You have to go up to the Junction for that.
In general, the land around many of our higher-order transit stations is grossly underutilized. And this is a perfect example of that. What should happen here are some large-scale upzonings.
Given the option, and assuming the weather is favorable, I think that most people would rather eat outside than inside. I know that I certainly would. And that is why one of the great silver linings of the pandemic has been the allocation of more public space toward outdoor dining. Here in Toronto that initiative is called CaféTO, and the impact has been significant:
Researchers for an association of local business improvement areas estimated that customers spent $181-million in the repurposed parking spaces in the summer of 2021. The same spaces would have generated $3.7-million in parking revenue, according to the local parking authority, and even that modest figure assumed prepandemic levels of demand.
The above figure is based on the 940 restaurants that participated in the CaféTO program in the summer of 2021. And the estimate is that they served some 4.9 million customers on repurposed parking spaces in the 13 weeks that officially make up summer.
What I’m not able to figure out from the report, though, is how much of this $181 million is truly incremental. If you look at the breakdown of restaurant sales in the report, participating restaurants saw 36% of sales from CaféTO, 26% from indoor dining, 25% from permanent patios, and 13% from takeout/delivery.
It generally makes sense that CaféTO would make up the largest share of sales. It was summer. And outside is where people want to be. But again, to what extent did CaféTO drive additional revenue for restaurants? Did it induce more people to dine out? And if these patios weren’t there, how much of the above 36% would have just shifted to indoor dining?
I don’t know exactly. We would need to see historic sales. But I’m sure it has been a boon to restaurants. There is no doubt in my mind that CaféTO is a great benefit to the city and that it should be a permanent fixture for as long as there are humans who both need to eat and who enjoy being outside in the summer.
I don’t know who is behind the guerrilla art project AusterityTO, but it is exceedingly clever. Whoever it is, they are going around Toronto and tagging various objects and moments with museum labels — all of which cite mayor John Tory as the artist. Here is one called “Urinal.”
And here is the installation description from the website:
A clever subversion of the seminal work “Fountain” by Marcel Duchamp. Water does not flow from this fountain due to neglected maintenance and lack of attention. It is a sculpture which asks the viewer to imagine what it could be, and to ponder why it isn’t. However, the artist’s title also challenges the viewer, much as Toronto challenges the citizen to find ways to make the most out of what we have: the washrooms are frequently locked, and perhaps this fountain can be repurposed for something else.
There is growing frustration in Toronto around the quality of our public services and spaces. I can’t open Twitter these days without coming across at least one photo of a busted and/or overflowing garbage bin. And now these sorts of posts are all being tagged with #AusterityTO.
