New renderings are updated in the database! There are some project information changes in the database. The total unit count changed from 44 to 45 units. The total parking space count changed from 64 parking to 52 parking. Finally, the overall building height increased from 34.40m to 37.60m.

The renderings are taken from the architectural plan via the Rezoning application:

PLN - Architectural Plans - MAY 5  2022-1.jpg


PLN - Architectural Plans - MAY 5  2022-72.jpg


PLN - Architectural Plans - MAY 5  2022-73.jpg


PLN - Architectural Plans - MAY 5  2022-74.jpg


PLN - Architectural Plans - MAY 5  2022-75.jpg
 


Alterations to Heritage Properties and Authority to Enter into a Heritage Easement Agreement - 110-116 Avenue Road

This item will be considered by Toronto Preservation Board on July 11, 2022.

Summary
This report recommends that City Council approve the alterations proposed for the properties at 110-116 Avenue Road under Section 42 of the Ontario Heritage Act in connection with the proposed redevelopment of the site. This report also recommends that City Council grant authority to enter into a Heritage Easement Agreement for heritage properties at 110-112 Avenue Road.

Located on the west side of Avenue Road at the intersection with Tranby Avenue, south of Davenport Road the properties at 110-112 Avenue Road form a pair of semi-detached houses constructed in 1891 reflecting both Queen Anne Revival and Richardsonian Romanesque architectural styles. The properties at 114-116 Avenue Road are vacant lots. The subject lands are part of the East Annex Heritage Conservation District (By-law 1994- 0520).

In conjunction with a Zoning Bylaw Amendment application, the development proposal is for a 9-storey mixed-use building at 110-116 Avenue Road. The proposed alterations retain and incorporate the heritage buildings at 110-112 Avenue Road and are consistent with the existing heritage policy framework. The proposals are considered acceptable within the broader conservation strategy and the heritage impacts will be appropriately mitigated.​
 

The new building from developer Sierra Communities would include 45 units, 350 square metres of retail space and an underground parking garage with 52 vehicle spaces and 46 bicycle spaces.

A fire of unknown origin in 2014 destroyed 116 Avenue Rd., where Soto Soto was located. While the fire has spurred a new development, residents have voiced concern since its proposal over how traffic will integrate into the two smaller adjacent streets of Tranby and Bernard Avenues.

Local councillor Mike Layton said city staff have worked very hard to mitigate impacts the new development would have on traffic in the Annex. Although those issues are still to be worked out, he is now in support of the application.

Possible solutions include widening Tranby Avenue and making it a two-way street as opposed to a one-way going east as it currently is, and also possibly making a “laneway corridor” between the streets for easier movement. Another development is planned just north of the site at Bernard Avenue and Avenue Road, adding to possible congestion.

“By creating a laneway network around those [developments], it creates a bit of a buffer between the neighbourhood, as well as a better access point,” Layton said.

While many residents wanted the access point to the new development off of Avenue Road, city staff were not supportive of that, according to Layton. Instead, they have opted for a side street vehicle entrance because of hopes of making Avenue Road more pedestrian-friendly and potentially widening the street.

“We don’t want [Avenue Road to be] one driveway after another,” Layton said.

Heritage aspects of 110-112 Avenue Rd. will also be preserved, as the buildings date back to the early days of the Annex. Unfortunately, 114 Avenue Rd. had to be demolished due to neglect, according to Henry Wiercinski, a vice-char of the Annex Residents’ Association.

Nevertheless, he said the fact the other buildings have survived over the years is a “minor miracle,” and is happy to see them preserved.

“We’re quite attached to them,” he said.
 
Another database update. The total unit count changed from 45 units to 44 units. Finally, the total parking space count changed from 52 parking to 64 parking. No new renderings are updated it.
 
Comparatively minor changes, but this one is the subject of another ZBA resubmission, even though it got conditional approval in July; and SPA is now submitted as well. All, apparently just to keep @Art Tsai busy, I'm told...... LOL

A few details below, but first, the revised App and links:

* note the description below does not reflect the exacts stats. in the current resubmission.

1667292442564.png



Now, a side by side comparison that is up to date:

1667292538167.png



Some renders and Site Plan: (side question, has anyone told Mr. Wengle how we spell Coloured in Canada?)

1667292599346.png


1667292677622.png


1667292758063.png


1667292804113.png


1667292846828.png



Finally, a Materials Board:

1667292906048.png
 
Last edited:
The following changes are updated it. The overall total unit count changed from 44 units to 46 units. The total parking space count was reduced from 64 parking to 50 parking.

The renderings are taken from the architectural plan via Site Plan Approval.
 
The following changes are updated it. The overall total unit count changed from 44 units to 46 units. The total parking space count was reduced from 64 parking to 50 parking.
The side by side comparison above is a bit different from what you said. In any event, it's interesting to note that the building basically stays the same size, the unit count actually increases, but a number of the one bedroom suites are being replaced with 2 bedroom suites and a few 3 bedroom suites. The latest proposal is just cramming more bedrooms into smaller spaces. It's not like they're proposing family friendly suites, rather they're just making rooms inside suites smaller.
 
@Paclo

This one saw some new Arch. Plans in April '24.

Plans which, just to annoy everyone are entirely sideways, LOL
 

Back
Top