Today Wed Thu
It is forcast to be Thunderstorm at 11:00 PM EDT on May 21, 2013
Thunderstorm
25°/14°		 It is forcast to be Thunderstorm at 11:00 PM EDT on May 22, 2013
Thunderstorm
19°/13°		 It is forcast to be Chance of Rain at 11:00 PM EDT on May 23, 2013
Chance of Rain
15°/4°

12 Comments

cityscape

Alexandra Park Revs Up For Complete Revitalization

An aging social-housing neighbourhood will receive parks, more inviting streets, and shiny new housing.

By

Proposed rebuild of Alexandra Park, facing north. Image courtesy of Toronto Community Housing Corporation.

Although talk of expanding public transit in Toronto was the highlight of this week’s city council meeting, the much-needed revitalization of Alexandra Park—an aging social-housing neighbourhood located just south of Kensington Market—was also on the table. And unlike OneCity, it got the go-ahead.

The revitalization planning process is already four years in the making: the Toronto Community Housing Corporation (TCHC), along with Councillor Adam Vaughan (Ward 20, Trinity-Spadina), began a consultation process in 2008 with the residents of the 263 townhouses and two apartment buildings (including the Atkinson Housing Co-operative) that constitute this subsidized housing community.

A preliminary plan has been developed and re-zoning and Official Plan Amendments have been submitted. The goal is to transition the neighbourhood from one that is predominantly low-income and dominated by social housing, to one that is mixed in terms of both income and use. A four-year planning process may seem like slow going, but it’s fairly typical. Lawrence Heights, another public-housing neighbourhood, has been mired in the planning process for longer, with less achieved.

Council approved the revitalization in principle yesterday and gave the go-ahead for the creation of a plan to assist the community during the area’s transformation. According to Lizette Zuniga, director of development and real estate at TCHC, residents will be working with the housing provider to make sure that the community’s needs, including social service requirements, are met.

Alexandra Park Revitalization Master Plan. Image courtesy of Toronto Community Housing Corporation.

The revitalization aims to raze and replace 333 subsidized townhouses and apartments, refurbish 473 subsidized apartments, and add 1,540 units at market value. Alexandra Park sends more kids to university per capita than any other public-housing community in the country, according to Councillor Vaughan. “If we don’t create market housing in the neighborhood they will be economically evicted from the community,” said Vaughan. “The best and the brightest, the most engaged young people in the neighborhood, need a place to live.”

Retail space will be added at ground level, as well as two new public parks and public streets, which will connect the community to Spadina Avenue and Dundas Street West. The hope is that this will integrate the isolated neighborhood into the surrounding area.

Now that city council has given the go-ahead, TCH and development partner Tridel will work with architects and residents to begin designing the new housing. Because the community insisted on no displacement during the revitalization, the process will occur in phases over a period of 12 to 15 years. Vaughan predicted that work will commence within a matter of months. Existing tenants are guaranteed housing in the area during construction. Even those who chose to move off site will have housing upon return.

Alexandra Park was built in 1968. A report from last year described the housing as “decaying” and in a “poor state of repair.” Vaughan insisted that the drive behind the revitalization is to create increased opportunities within the community.

“The neighborhood is building a new future for itself, and anytime a community like Alexandra Park can play a role in redefining its options, its services, its physical space and its social capacity it’s an opportunity and a program that’s amazing to watch and wonderful to support.”

Comments

  • Vampchick21

    Hmmmm….in light of the deputy mayor’s very recent insistant that people shouldn’t raise kids downtown, I’d like him to consider these words: “Alexandra Park sends more kids to university per capita than any other public-housing community in the country”. And Alexandra Park is a double whammy, downtown and social housing.

  • Kn

    Looks like the city is rebuilding a public housing ghetto…..again.

    • OgtheDim

      You would prefer the status quo?

      • Kn

        Absolutely not but why not make a real attempt at integrating public housing into the community. Build market town homes along side public units. Introduce small co ops into close by communities. The proposal being rubber stamped by city hall is being driven by private developers who aren’t interested in good community based development. The heights of the market condos will far exceed any other development approved by city council in the immediate area. 3000 new residents into an already congested area. The whole concept is deeply flawed. Every community should provide affordable housing. Unfortunately even after this so called revitalization this area will have 50% of its community living in social housing. Its still segregation any way you look at it. Separate community centre, separate basketball courts, separate daycare…. It’s sad to think that new buildings equals new solutions.

        • BarryRice

          35% will be social housing, 1540 condo units and 800 public housing units.

        • Vampchick21

          Are you and I reading the same proposal?

        • http://circusesnotbread.wordpress.com/ Barnum Bailey

          It’s not the developers who, as you put it, “aren’t interested in good community based development.” The existing residents don’t want to be pushed off site and the ones who have left want the right to return. You can also blame homeowners who, generally speaking, will fight tooth and nail to avoid having social housing in their backyard lest it affect their property values. Besides which, if you want to disperse social housing residents all over the city, which would have advantages, good luck providing them services they can access.

  • Avaughan

    Actually the plan has been led by residents from the beginning. A developer has been announced, but to date none of the massing and planning has had any input from the private sector partner. As for integration the neighbourhood used to be 100% social housing. The proposal now mixes the community. It also used to be 100% housing the proposal calls for new retail spaces (some to be community owned)

    -Councillor Adam Vaughan

  • Anonymous

    Is it just me, or all those internal-but-unenclosed courtyards just going to become the new abandoned spaces? Why not a tight grid with buildings that engage it? Are the market condo units going to have fine-grained commercial on the ground floor?

  • Kn

    Actually, the plan was led by the residents of the Atkinson public housing NOT the community of Alexandra Park. Also, the area of Alexandra park is NOT comprised of 100% public housing. You are referring to Atkinson coop. In fact, there are two large public housing projects in this small community which comprise approximately 70-75% of the local population. The impact of these public housing projects is very apparent when you walk along Augusta, Dundas, Carr or Denison Ave. Long fences define what’s public housing and what’s not. This division is clearly defined. In addition to this, a large majority of the market housing in Alexandra park consists of illegal rooming houses. This means that this area has one of the lowest per capita incomes in Canada.

    Integration, in any significant measure, will not happen as these same public housing residents have demanded zero displacement. (Zero displacement means the gangs won’t be going anywhere, as they use the large public housing community to hide.) Add to this a separate community centre, separate daycare and separate basketball courts etc and the city is well on their way to rebuilding what already exists – Segregation. Segregation in the community and the local school.

    From the map, this area is looking like St James town. (and we all know how well that high density area integrated into it’s surroundings.) The city has proposed 14 to 20 story buildings on Dundas. Yet, the city has fought every other developer in the immediate area to keep their structures under 10 stories – and rightfully so. Augusta Ave was burdened with 3 high rises decades ago. These eyesores remind us of how poorly this type of misguided development destroys a neighbourhood. (Can you imagine a 12 or 20 story building in the middle of Kensington market or Palmerston Ave? Neither can I.) So why does anyone at city hall think this is good city planning in Alexandra Park?

    Building condos will also effectively lock out families from moving into the area while doubling the local population. Brad Lamb has stated that he can hardly give away 3 bedroom condos. It sounds admirable on paper but in practicality it’s clearly not the typology that most families who are spending 600k-900k dollars are looking for. In Brad’s words “It isn’t what people want now”. And why is the city offering only 4 townhomes in this proposal? I thought the city wanted to attract families into the core of the city? Are we giving up on diversifying Ryerson public school?

    The TCHC has a total of approximately 230000 people in and/or waiting for public housing. That’s just under 5% of the total population of Toronto. Alexandra park, will have over 35% of it’s population in public housing after this revitalization finishes. Having this kind of public housing density gave us the the Atkinson and Regent park gangs. (Yes, I’m talking about the same people who brought us the Eaton centre shootings.) For this reason alone we should be bringing a much more critical eye on this type of approach to social housing.

    The city needs to focus on creating a sustainable plan for affordable housing. A plan that requires that the tenants are involved and held accountable. A vision that understands that communities are and need to be dynamic entities. A smaller and more intimate building typology would allow affordable housing to be truly woven into every community. It would allow the public housing system to respond to the economic reality of changing real estate costs as well. While the many people struggle to afford smaller and smaller condominiums in the core of the city, the TCHC plods on thinking it’s reasonable to build townhomes in the centre of the city as “affordable” housing. (Market townhomes cost a million dollars downtown.) This is not an efficient or balanced approach to providing public housing. If you think an expensive TCHC party is obscene, why isn’t anyone asking why the city and TCHC are proposing to give Atkinson coop residents town homes to live in while 70000 people stand by on a waiting lists? Newsflash, this is not 1968.

    Has the city actually invited experts from the other developed countries to share their experiences? Have we studied how the general public view public housing? Have we examined the relationship between large public housing projects and criminal activity? Everybody back in the 70s thought Atkinson coop and Regent park were wonderfully progressive projects. Nobody would argue that now.

    Progressive solutions come from open and honest dialogue, not political maneuvering.

  • Kn

    Multiple shootings at TCHC properties in a week. Sadly, this is no surprise to anyone who might live close to or in a TCHC property. What makes this more disturbing? The response from city officials. Deporting people from Toronto. Denials that these crimes are being committed by public housing residents. City officials insisting that it’s “outsiders” shooting AT residents living in public housing. Anybody at city hall think to ask why? In fact, only last week, I was told that Atkinson coop was being rebuilt solely because they were poorly built. Are they kidding? This simply goes to illustrate how dysfunctional this system is.

    Yes mayor, we need programs. Yes we need more police walking in the community. Yes we need to thoroughly reevaluate how we provide social housing in Toronto. We need politicians, public servants and TCHC representatives to be willing to examine these problems honestly and objectively. We need research. Research that the city hasn’t committed to.

    We need the media to start asking why this hasn’t happened.

    If the demand for affordable housing is 5-6% (in fact, it’s approx. 4% of Toronto’s population) why is the concentration of affordable housing in Alexandra park at 70-75%? After this so called “revitalization”, it will be 35%. The same probably could be said for Regent park and Lawrence heights. ( NO this doesn’t mean I am a racist, bigot, or nihilist.) It has nothing to do with saying not in my backyard. It’s a recognition that a new approach is needed to address the segregation and stigmatization these public housing communities have had to endure for decades.

    Understanding public opinion and local demographics, are critical to moving toward this goal. The city doesn’t seem to think so. If the city did, they would have conducted surveys and questionnaires in an attempt to comprehend the complexities of the Alexandra park area. And herein lies the core issue. Social housing needs to be invisibly integrated into all communities. Once affordable housing is identifiable as a separate entity, the system has failed. It perpetuates the “us and them” condition that has made public housing an enslavement, not an opportunity.

    Criminologist from the University of Toronto and Ryerson only weeks ago identified that the feelings of segregation and alienation still exist in Regent park. Gang activity is still prevalent. Why wouldn’t it be? The gangs still identify this area as their home turf. It’s a function of a very large population of disenfranchised people that were forced into a public housing ghetto decades ago.

    And Now, after 6 years of Revitalization in Regent park? They simply see their community as “two solitudes”. The market families won’t be sending their children to the local school and thus, the cycle continues. (I personally know people who worked on the design of these revitalization projects. They live in the neighbourhood. Their child won’t be attending their local school.)

    The Atkinson coop revitalization is being driven by private funds exclusively. What does this mean? It means that the only way to achieve zero displacement is to sell a huge number of condo units doubling the Alexandra park population. And who is this good for? Does it address any of the core issues? What about the waiting lists? Gangs? Traffic? School? Diversity and Integration? Sorry it doesn’t work.

    Alternatives? The concept of a coop is not new. The concept of affordable housing isn’t new either. In fact, the story repeats itself decade after decade as new, hard working immigrants make Canada their home. Dads, moms, cousins, grandparents, uncles/aunts, and friends all live and work in a tight community to survive and prosper. This model works because each family member contributes, respects and is accountable to each other. It worked for my grandfather in the 30′s and it worked for my wife’s family in the 70′s. Actually, come to think of it, it worked for my great great grandparents in the 1800′s when my mother’s family came to Canada. Create small, intimate structures, throughout the city, that fashion themselves after this cooperative model. Capture the positivity that comes from living in a coop or small community and make it small enough that it won’t allow gangs to flourish and blend in. These buildings also need to respond to the economic realities of the community in which they are situated. Don’t build townhomes in the centre of the city and call them affordable housing. Let the tenants decide what community they want to live in accordingly. Need more space? Move further from the city core. Most of all, don’t restrict them to large public housing campuses.

    Small is beautiful.

    • Black_Fist

      Very well said and I totally agree with every point you made, in particular with the fact that affordable housing in itself carries it’s own stigmatization and when it is identifiable as a separate entity by the outside community, any attempts at ‘revitalization’ will ultimately fail (if the goal is in fact to integrate the poor with the affluent). It perpetuates the “us and them” condition that has made public housing an enslavement, not an opportunity. I was born in Alexandra Park but lived in the co-op section on carr street which was considerably different than the housing section.