Undead
Senior Member
It's because this project is likely marketed to the kind of buyer who won't take the subway.
- Thread starter Marcanadian
- Start date
Northern Light
Superstar
Similar to the project up at the former Cineplex HQ this will be marketed to the luxury buyer, not the median buyer.
Many will insist on driving; but even those who do use TTC will, on average, want to have at least one car.
The ratio may be a bit high, even from a consumer demand point-of-view, but if they are way off, they'll cut it back.
Do I like to see that much parking? Absolutely not; do I understand why the developer is planning for it; yes.
DevDudeToronto
New Member
Absolutely ridiculous that city planners are limiting the size of this building to 10 storeys. This should easily be 20+. People complain about a housing crisis and blame developers, but they should be looking squarely at the idiotic decisions of city planners and their superiors. Also, what are they doing by increasing the parking numbers on this building. No doubt again this was requested by planners. So stupid.
Last edited by a moderator:
Northern Light
Superstar
That's not what was proposed by the developer.
The local residents would have appealed anything in that height range, assuming it were proposed, which it would not have been at this site. Its exceedingly unlikely it would have been approved at that height by the OLT; and if it were, the locals would almost certainly have attempted to appeal to divisional court. All of which costs the developer lots of time, and money.
This was not requested by Planning. This is being marketed as a luxury building, and the developer has determined that is what the buyers it is targeting will require.
*****
It is perfectly reasonable to say the original proposal for this building is something you would have supported/preferred ( I liked it too)
It is equally reasonable to note and critique where we have planning rules that unduly restrict usage (purpose-built rental for instance), or even heights of 3s may hard to obtain.
It is not reasonable to ascribe blame wrongly, without supporting evidence, for the course of a particular project.
Nor is it fair to imagine that Planning sits up nights thinking of ways to obstruct development. It simply isn't so, in a City that is the fastest growing in terms of development on the continent.
Rather, Planning first has to address rules the way they are; and then yes, propose to modify the Official Plan and Zoning to be more permissive in many cases.
However, to do so, it must be able to get that Plan approved, first by Council, then past any appeal period to the now OLT, and then (in the case of an Official Plan or Secondary Plan) past the province.
It's worth noting that Planning has proposed many plans that would ease development restrictions in the City; only to see them watered down at Council, or passed by Council and whither under endless appeals by residents/businesses etc unhappy with what Council approved.
That is not say that they could not and should not be more ambitious at times; but your criticisms here reads as excessive.
****
Let's also add, that the housing crisis is about a lot more than just gross housing supply; though that is certainly a key factor.
xy3
Active Member
What drives me nuts is the development almost directly the street, that dosent fit into the neighborhood architecturally,,,, is 3x the height and didnt get a haircut,
Downtown Toronto
Active Member
The sales office will be located at 211 Avenue Rd which they purchased earlier this summer, based on past posts on this thread it will than be given to the city as offsite parkland
Last edited:
Kenojuak
Active Member
Smart
AlbertC
Superstar
Devron will go it alone to develop Toronto’s 101 Spadina
Devron Developments has received zoning approval from the City of Toronto to move forward with a 39-storey 101 Spadina condominium development at the southeast corner of Spadina Avenue and Adelaide Street West.
renx.ca