News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 5.8K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 29K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 2.8K     0 

  1. S

    Toronto | 95 St Joseph | 130.9m | 39s | Daniels | Core Architects

    TEYCC approved the motion below, to forward the item Without Recommendation.
  2. S

    Toronto | 95 St Joseph | 130.9m | 39s | Daniels | Core Architects

    On March 14th, the Toronto Preservation Board met to consider a Staff Recommendation to accept the Alterations proposed. The recommendation was rejected, as too destructive to a "landmark building", resulting in a "Cormier light"".
  3. S

    Toronto | 95 St Joseph | 130.9m | 39s | Daniels | Core Architects

    Thanks for the clarification. The revised application states that the building is not Heritage Registered, but makes no reference to the unanimous adoption of Intention to Designate, passed by City Council on March 9th, 2022 - a month before the revisions were submitted.
  4. S

    Toronto | 95 St Joseph | 130.9m | 39s | Daniels | Core Architects

    Hi Albert, I'm curious as to how you interpret this? The wording suggests that an "Approval" is Under Review, whereas previously an "Application" was Under Review. Is that just another way of saying the same thing?
  5. S

    Toronto | 95 St Joseph | 130.9m | 39s | Daniels | Core Architects

    Subsequent to this Intention to Designate hearing (calling out this line in particular: staff have determined that the property at 95 St. Joseph Street merits designation under Part IV Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act for its design, associative and contextual value. This recommendation...
  6. S

    Toronto | 95 St Joseph | 130.9m | 39s | Daniels | Core Architects

    I can see my living room, in this pic. 😇
  7. S

    Toronto | 95 St Joseph | 130.9m | 39s | Daniels | Core Architects

    They said it’s still 39 stories… the 15 storey 2nd tower is now just a 13 storey ‘podium’.
  8. S

    Toronto | 95 St Joseph | 130.9m | 39s | Daniels | Core Architects

    I was in the Working Group meetings at City Hall, where the developer was asked to revisit their plans in light of various areas of concern. Anecdotally, I've since heard they've submitted modifications, but none that have been approved by Planning. Today, City TV news is onsite filming...
  9. S

    Toronto | 95 St Joseph | 130.9m | 39s | Daniels | Core Architects

    How do you know this? The city’s preliminary report doesn’t exactly embrace the idea of re-zoning this property. The UT Secondary Plan does not embrace density in this location either with the old plan (which prevails) nor with the revised Secondary Plan awaiting approval. Given that the...
  10. S

    Toronto | 95 St Joseph | 130.9m | 39s | Daniels | Core Architects

    Don't take it personally. The 'angry' people just seem to want people who live downtown (seems many of them don't) to be unhappy. It doesn't matter whether you want, or don't want the project....just so long as whether it happens or not, it must happen in the worst-possible configuration for...
  11. S

    Toronto | 95 St Joseph | 130.9m | 39s | Daniels | Core Architects

    With The Britt about to open, and the new 1075 Bay announced, I'd guess it'll tilt toward the luxury market, and hope it does. The more expensive, the better. Anything the development can do, to boost my $ / SF too, would be great. Well, unless hoping it does something GOOD for me is too...
  12. S

    Toronto | 95 St Joseph | 130.9m | 39s | Daniels | Core Architects

    I'm not sure I understand. Just because my condo cost a lot, means I shouldn't care if it gets no natural light? I really am not following, sorry.
  13. S

    Toronto | 95 St Joseph | 130.9m | 39s | Daniels | Core Architects

    With the small exception of "no, they haven't". I'm not talking about north-ward sun/shade issues. I'm talking about the fact that the only light coming into my room comes from a north-facing window. Put a large tower in front of that, and it will de facto become darker. It's not...
  14. S

    Waterfront Transit Reset Phase 1 Study

    I'm not sure what the issue is here. Another NIMBY expecting a transfer-free trip through the city? Funny how you're allowed to be infuriated about things which affect you (but are in the city's best interest), but others can't be remotely curious about things that affect them. Seems a...
  15. S

    Toronto | 95 St Joseph | 130.9m | 39s | Daniels | Core Architects

    Maybe not, be EVERYone in town is entitled to ASK for a view. That's the only thing I have suggested, on this thread. Well that, and occasional daylight.
  16. S

    Toronto | 95 St Joseph | 130.9m | 39s | Daniels | Core Architects

    Completely agree with that. As I've said previously, I knew there was going to be a development, last July. It's only now seeing it, that I would like to voice my opinion about it, so that the developer's voice isn't the only one being heard.
  17. S

    Toronto | 95 St Joseph | 130.9m | 39s | Daniels | Core Architects

    [MODERATOR's NOTE: A couple of posts of a personal nature have been removed.] A discussion forum is made richer with contributions from those ACTUALLY impacted by a developer's attempt to make money, than populated solely by those who don't even live in the neighbourhood. Again, this is...
  18. S

    Toronto | 95 St Joseph | 130.9m | 39s | Daniels | Core Architects

    Nothing in this proposal has been approved by planning. This is a developer asking if they can CHANGE the zoning (which the planners implemented). Should the developer be the only voice allowed to communicate with the planners? Or should the public get a chance to provide an alternate...
  19. S

    Toronto | 95 St Joseph | 130.9m | 39s | Daniels | Core Architects

    Glad to hear it. So in your opinion, Developers should be able to do ANYTHING they want, regardless of any type of impact to anybody else in the city. Then why even bother with a city plan? Or planners? Or zoning? Heck, you could even get rid of urbantoronto, since there would be no...

Top