Whitby Shores Community Forums

Hi...

Just a few reflections on what you wrote...my thoughts only but hoping to generate some dialogue:

"Not everyone objects to proposed Eco Place development.[/b] Why do so many people want Whitby to be left behind the rest of the GTA. If developments such as Eco Place do not get built here, businesses will say "screw ya" and head to Vaughan or Brampton or anywhere else but Durham."  

* Of the 85 hectares of "prestige industrial park" land under consideration, only about 15 hectares will be allocated to "business" if the land is changed to "mixed use". And that business will be office buildings and a hotel, not the corporate head offices that are currently supposed to go there. Leaving the land alone and not re-zoning it ensures that all that land will go to jobs...all 85 acres of it.

"If that development does not go through, then some lovely industrial park or big box stores will. I'd prefer Eco Place to that ugly mess."

* Not true...the "prestige industrial park" designation specifically prohibits big box stores. It does allow good, corporate office jobs instead.  If we allow Ecoplace to go through, and the land becomes "mixed use", we will get lots and lots and lots of condos, and a very little commercial/office space (and maybe even a big box store, which would be allowed under "mixed use").

If left as is, the land must be developed as a business park, with very specific elements: including a campus environment, green space, pathways, a grass berm barrier along Victoria, natural features and good paying, knowledge economy jobs. That is what the official plan calls for. Please read the Lynde Shores (Whitby Shores) official plan on the Twon website.

Please go to www.glenlyonbusinesspark.com to see an excellent example of what the current Whitby official plan strives for: good sized head offices and other high end employers. If all we get are the proposed office buildings, it will get filled with accountants and lawyers and other small employers.

I don't want to stop development of the land, just the kind that the developer is asking for.  

For myself, I would rather see that campus-environment of high end employers than 40 really big condos right on Victoria.

WSH

Thats cool Ernie...I hope everyone takes as much of an interest as you.

One point: as I understand LEED, it is a scale to determine how "green" your building is...it does not designate any "live/work" standards.  There is a LEED ND standard (LEED Neighbourhood Development) that creates such a scale but it is currently only in the pilot phase and is being tried in only 2 or 3 places in Canada right now (including Don Lands in Toronto).

FYI...if we applied the the LEED ND standard to Ecoplace, we would get a higher DU (developed unit) number than even the Don Lands project (which has over 100/DU per hectare and is being buolt right on the Toronto waterfront where land is very scarce).  

Anyway you slice it, Ecoplace is FAR too dense. And probably over 80% of the land would be condos not employers.

By the way, if you really want to see a good "live/work" concept, Google "Quarry Park" in Calgary....its amazing what you can do with a good plan.

WHS

Two thoughts:

1. I agree with your comment about the Brock Street Exit -- its brutal in many ways. Hopefully when they build the Lakeridge exit, they can take into account some form of appropriate "Welcome to Whitby" marker, since it will mark the western edge of town. Now all we need to do is improve the marking on the eastern edge, so that people will know they've left the 'shwa and entered our beautiful town.

2. There are many who first came to Whitby when it was a quiet town, and came here for that particular reason. Do we really want people to see it as a "happening place" -- will that change the little town image that we seem to be fighting to hold on to?

Just my opinions.

In response: For myself...It's not about the "happening place" factor...it's about whatever works to lower my property tax bill from a ridiculous amount...so I don't have to sell and move somewhere affordable.

just my 2.5 cents.

I think the "big singnage" is a key to success...In fact, high profile signage along the 400 is one of the things that the business park should ensure in its planning.

One other quick thought...I know the developer talks about a "live/work" community but I would suggest that when the Gordon/Victoria lands are developed as a great business park, then we will already have achieved a "live/work community" called Whitby Shores (from the 401 to the water).

We will then have a well rounded area to call home: good employers, good mix of housing, rec facilities, conservation area, GO station, harbour, walking trails, shopping plaza, etc...

Really, if you work in the business park, you could walk home after work, stopping in at A&P for groceries...no car needed!

Whitby Shores could just be Quarry Park-ish. Just need the prestige business park!!!

WSH






Quarry Park is indeed a nice looking acheivement. That concept would fit nicely here. Although I feel the taller buildings planned here would finally draw attention to Whitby especially along the 401. Part of the equation is to bring focus on Whitby by passersby. Aside  from the boards on the 401 mentioning entering Whitby, there is nothing that punctuates the fact that anything happens here. Not even a welcome sign on the 401. The Brock St exit welcome sign is poorly placed IMHO. But I digress. Basically I am saying that exposed taller buildings will make people think "hey this place seems to be happening" lets check it out. Building something low key and below the radar will get no ones attention. Plus these businesses that lease into a signature site would like their sign exposed to the 401 and GO train traffic. Going low will hide it behind Sobeys.
[/quote]

All very valid points.

Additionally, anyone knowledgeable with the process will tell you that commercial and industrial development is the key to reducing property tax burdens. If the negotiations can sway the development to less residential and more commercial/industrial, we can achieve the goal of potentially reducing our current property tax burdens.

And potentially ruining our quaint little neighbourhood. I'm pulling for a Residential/Commercial mix. No industrial thanks...

Jabber.

Hi...I think that there is every possibility that the developer has asked for more than they are expecting to get, and that "community consultation" would be seen to limit the proposal.  

The problem with that is that we end up with the original concept, pared down in the name of compromise.

I just think that its just way too dense in this form...see the little dots on the road to the left...those are cars.



But hey...if they come back with a design like Port Credit Village, I may just have to re-think it.

But even if we leave the zoning alone, there are lots of examples out there of innovative ways to develop the land to create jobs and to make Whitby into "the place to work"...it requires vision and commitment.  See http://www.enjoy-work.com/html/images.html for an award winning workplace vision.

I just don't think the current Ecoplace design is what Whitby needs...a great big massing of 8500 condos?  To be honest, it looks to me like their vision is based on just taking St. Jamestown, doubling the number of high rises and adding some offices on the end (and very little green space).

To sustain ourselves we need jobs not high rises.

WSH






- I'm sure it has occurred to everyone the possibility that the developer has proposed a large number of towers (40 is a lot), with every intention of "grudgingly" reducing that number to satisfy residents.  I think it very likely that we are all party to a simple theatre - that is the developer gets the mayor and council on board, announces a huge development, holds public meetings, public is outraged, more hearings, developer caves on a few issues, public gets to say they "listened to us", development gets built.  WSH, why do you think this thing will play out any differently?

Interesting article Jason.

It is true we need to be careful and what we oppose, and what we could get in the end.... perhaps a loud recycling plant as in the article!

Most people I've spoken to conceptually agree with Ecoplace, citing increased employment opportunities and more places to go/shop, but also have 2 concerns: the intesity and traffic.

Intensity: I've suggested to Liz there would be greater acceptance if there were less condo's or keep the max height consistent with the other buildings in the area.... or at least moving the taller ones away from Victoria giving the community a little more breathing room.

Traffic: Really need to tackle this first.. the entire Henry/Victoria/Brock area needs a revamp first.

Reality is something will be built eventually so we need to pick and choose who we want to oppose or work with.

I think that the point is that if we fight the proposed development entirely, and somehow manage to win, that after that almost anything else could be proposed for the place, regardless of the rezoning requirements.

I could easily see the developer using as part of the argument that the neighbourhood opposes anything (based on our current opposition to their current plan), and that based on that argument, they would be willing to try to force anything into the space, just to get some return on it.

I agree with those that say we need to pick and choose which battles we wish to fight, and which ones we give in gracefully on.