|
[July, 2007]
Late last month the Ontario Municipal Board released its decision to allow Bridgepoint Health
to proceed with plans to redevelop the site of the former Riverdale Hospital—the so-called "Half Round"
located near the heart of downtown Toronto. In addition to the construction of a new hospital on the site,
these plans include demolition of the Half Round and the division of the large parcel of public and parkland
it sits on into blocks for mixed use development.
Citizens For Riverdale Hospital ("CRH"), an
association of concerned area residents and
professionals in the architectural and sustainable development fields argued that the demolition of a structurally
sound building that is just over 40 years old, in excellent condition and capable of being reused should be preceded
by an analysis of the environmental costs of the demolition. CRH highlighted the fact that in terms of the building's
"embodied energy"—just the fuel required to make the concrete contained in the 330,000 sq. ft. building and replace it
with a new structure would result in the emission of approximately 77,000 metric tonnes of greenhouse gases.
The City of Toronto's greenhouse gas emissions "Better Buildings Program" results in annual savings of approximately 72,000 tonnes
of emissions. This one demolition completely erases this "flagship" program’s gains. Viewed another way, this is the equivalent 77, 000
Canadians meeting their "One Tonne Challenge", or putting 20,000 more vehicles on the roads for a year with each driving approximately 15,000 kms.
The new hospital will be constructed beside the old with the old remaining open until the new is fully functional and patients can simply be
transferred. As a result, both buildings can clearly co-exist, because they will have to for a number of years while construction takes place. The
proponent and City also acknowledged that the Half Round could be used for affordable housing, seniors housing, offices etc. but no consideration
was ever given to these approaches. Instead, the 330,000 sq. ft. structure will be replaced with a 100,000 sq. ft. structure on the old building's
footprint and intended for almost exactly these same types of uses. The city will lose 230,000 sq. ft., or more than two thirds of the built form
even when the new building is complete. The new building is also 10 to 15 years away from completion.
Aside from failing to even consider other opportunities in a City in great need of more places for people to live
this also appears to be the antithesis of intensification, which most planners agree is the only way to reduce urban sprawl.
In addition, the proponent's witnesses gave evidence that although they agreed the building could be reused, no
analysis of either the financial costs of retrofit vs. demolition or the environmental impacts was ever considered.
The Official Plans that apply to the project all have stated goals, objectives and targets for greenhouse gas emissions.
The proponent planner's evidence was that they had no idea if these were or were not being met and that they were irrelevant.
It is ironic that many of the long-term care patients who reside there suffer from chronic respiratory illnesses that are
often associated with air pollution. It is also noteworthy that as a public hospital on City lands the project is almost
entire funded by public taxes. Despite the fact that neither the City nor the proponent addressed the environmental evidence
and arguments submitted by CRH at the hearing, the Board held that any and all environmental concerns have been refuted.
Consequently CRH is seeking leave to appeal to the Divisional Court for failing to comply with the numerous Provincial and
City planning policies that expressly support a more environmentally responsible approach.
|