COUNCIL ‘SNAIL PACE’ ON TORONTO FORESHORE PARK DISAPPOINTING

TFPG Update June 2020

The community is disappointed at Council’s snail pace on resolving the acknowledged need for more parkland in Toronto. Council’s resolution of 23 September 2019, which included deferment of work on planning for a 6-storey commercial development on the Bath Street foreshore site, was subject to a number of other actions. It is this detail and interpretation that is causing the angst with the community and, we understand, with some Councillors.

Amongst these actions, or part thereof, was to review the best future use of the Bath Street site against Council’s Sustainability Policy. We understand that consultants have been engaged. Council’s published timeline shows that this review will be finalised between July and October this year with the outcome of this review likely to be used to determine the future use of the land. This is despite there being no consultation (seeking information or advice) with the community on the future use of this important public land.

Whilst sustainability reviews are good public policy in themselves, these can be very subjective. Great care is required in the numerical weighting assigned to the different components and, more importantly, choosing which particular options are to be modelled. Unless this decision making is open, including community input, then outcomes can be easily biased. We are not aware of an open and transparent process with this review design so whilst not wanting to appear cynical, do not hold high hopes of a true outcome when it arrives between July and October.

The Council decision to adopt a closed-door approach to community input into the future use of this public land at Bath Street is perplexing, particularly as it is at odds with the Local Government Act which requires Council to act in the interests of the “local community” and Council’s own City Vision which supports “shared decision making”. Apparently, Toronto must be excluded from this, unlike other areas in Lake Macquarie. We note, for example, that the development and rebuilding of the badly fire damaged Awaba House includes a Community Reference Group. Newcastle City Council recently decided to upgrade the Newcastle Ocean Baths without community input, resulting in community outrage. Council fortunately changed their procedures and through working with the community instead, developed better processes and outcomes. A Council and community working together saves time, money and ensures good outcomes for future generations.

During this entire Bath Street fiasco, Council also appears to have ignored the economic value of an attractive park and the economic stimulus that such a facility can provide to a town and community. There have been many investigations and reports prepared worldwide on the economic benefits of attractive parks and particularly waterfront parks. Peter Harnik in his article “Measuring the Economic Value of a City Park System” certainly recognises the significant role in stimulating tourism but it also acknowledges increased property, health and community cohesion values, as well as the economic value of reducing costs of treating stormwater runoff and improving air quality. Other authors identify that waterfront parks when combined with good urban design enhance the “local identity” of a place which acts as a drawcard for visitors. Locally one only has to look across the lake to Warners Bay where the economic impacts of a waterfront park are very obvious.

Imagine the tourism potential for Toronto and surrounds from an attractive Bath Street park with some recreational based community facilities. This could form part of an entire improved foreshore park, with a link to an upgraded Greenway path for cyclists and pedestrians through to Fassifern.

To quote the acclaimed architect Elizabeth Farrelly - an “unalterable truth: our parks are absolutely our shared lifelines and, as our lives become more constrained, our parks become all that more essential.” With the rapid population growth and apartment blocks being built in our area, Council’s own planning documents identify that the population growth rate around Toronto is projected to be 20% and will require “an additional 2.12 hectares of community land by 2030 for open space and recreation facilities.” Our area urgently needs this public Bath Street land to be included as an attractive park.

Unfortunately, it appears that Council is not interested in consulting and finding out community wishes so please take the initiative yourself and tell Council and your Councillors what you would like to see on this public land.

Keep up to date at http://tfpg.org.au/