AlbertC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
15,237
Reaction score
31,571
City:
Toronto


A proposed 13-storey residential building with 66 condominium apartment units at 1140 Yonge Street will include three luxury townhouses facing Macpherson Avenue. It will be built above the facade of a commercial space that was originally constructed as a showroom for luxury automobile maker Pierce-Arrow.

Devron and Constantine Enterprises Inc. partnered to develop the property, and Audax Architecture and ERA Architects Inc. are behind the design, including the new tower and the restoration of the facade to its original state.

The vision for 1140 Yonge’s commercial podium, according to the developers, is to serve as a “front porch” for the Summerhill and Rosedale communities. A restaurant space is proposed at street-level with high, arched windows — a patio space on Marlborough Avenue will create a transition from Yonge Street to the adjacent low-rise neighbourhood. The goal is to reanimate the streetscape and provide a more vibrant pedestrian experience compared to the current big-box store format that has operated for years.

The developers say that 1140 Yonge will be “the best building in the city; one that will celebrate and enrich the property’s heritage, reach for the highest sustainability standards”. It will become the first Passive House condominium in Toronto.

----------
The Pierce-Arrow showroom was built at 1140 Yonge Street in 1930 and the retail space remained operational until the Pierce-Arrow brand was discontinued in 1938.

The building’s history is interesting. After being used as a showroom for luxury vehicles, 1140 Yonge Street became a warehouse after World War II until it was acquired by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) in 1954. TV shows produced here include North America’s longest running television quiz show, Front Page Challenge (1957-1995), the Wayne and Shuster Show, the Tommy Hunter Show, and children’s TV show Mr. Dressup, among others. The CBC made alterations to the exterior of the building to facilitate filming. In 1991 after CBC relocated to a single downtown production facility, retailer ‘The Business Depot’ moved into the space that was later rebranded as Staples.

Part of the existing Staples store building is being marketed for lease for up to a two-year term. The southern half of the former store, spanning about 8,000 square feet on one level, features 35-foot ceilings facing Yonge Street and a 14-foot ceiling further in.
 

UtakataNoAnnex

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 5, 2020
Messages
2,459
Reaction score
2,833
The Staples store is now closed:

Dec 2, 2020
Oh...so they're opening it up at the Art Shoppe?

...I guess it could be worse. As in, move it to north of the treeline, as oppose to just south of it as they're planning to now.
 

Rascacielo

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 5, 2017
Messages
2,083
Reaction score
12,850
A major improvement to the area, although from the article construction won't start for at least 2 years. I wish the developer would stop using the word 'iconic' though (Yonge & Summerhill an iconic intersection?) - it sounds like those click-bait tabloids referring to reality TV show contestants as 'stars'.
 

AlbertC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
15,237
Reaction score
31,571
City:
Toronto


1140y.jpg
 

daniel_kryz

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Messages
234
Reaction score
292
How this didn't get approved by City Council is beyond me. Imo, the city doesn't fight the bad proposals and doesn't encourage the good ones. Also, why not make this section of Yonge a mid-rise street? It would complement the Scrivener Square development much better, instead of having a pair of skyscrapers surrounded by tiny buildings.
 

Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
14,607
Reaction score
27,813
How this didn't get approved by City Council is beyond me. Imo,

That will have everything to do with the area Councillor; and the number of neighbours/area residents writing objections to both the Councillor and Planning.

The proposal, while attractive, did violate existing planning rules for the site. As we all know, such rules are changeable and this happens often in Toronto.

However, when a proposal happens in an affluent community (as this one is), it is generally subject to a higher degree of rigour than would otherwise be the case.

I am not suggesting that that is fair or good public policy, it's just the reality of the day.

Planning will take a lot of heed of what the Councillor wants; they will sometimes disagree, but it certainly matters.

The Councillor will take note of what the area wants, that's doubly true if that area is a key source of support, both political and financial.

The Council tends to defer to the neighbourhood Councillor, because they would like the same consideration in their ward.

the city doesn't fight the bad proposals

City planning tends to follow the rules (though in the odd case may creatively interpret them)........

If something passes the legal/process thresholds for approval; and the Councillor isn't objecting strenuously, it goes through.

If the development breaches the rules; in a bad way; Planning may well seek to stifle it.

There's a limited suite of options.

and doesn't encourage the good ones.

Planning definitely tries to help applications they are positive on; but political support for same matters.

Also, why not make this section of Yonge a mid-rise street?

It will be, it's already happening. At 13 storeys, this is actually considered hirise.

The City's definition of midrise is 5-12 floors.

****

Let me finish off by noting, I like this proposal, and I hope a good settlement allowing approval is reached at LPAT.
 

xy3

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 5, 2021
Messages
97
Reaction score
95
How infuriating. This makes me wish we brought back the OMB. I think the councillor has far too much influence.

Does this proposal stand a chance if the developer removed a floor from the lower section? It could still look quite elegant at 12 floors and would fit the city's defintion of midrise?

Or Is it possible planning would come to a more reasonable compromise and greenlight the current proposal if the developer makes a large donation to local park revitalization/street art etc?

Or is council and the nimbyfolk so dead set on destroying this that we'll see the land sold and some ugly contemporary glass condo eventually replace it?
 
Last edited:

Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
14,607
Reaction score
27,813
How infuriating. This makes me wish we brought back the OMB.

We did, they're just called the LPAT.

I think the councillor has far too much influence.

The Councillor has as much influence as any other. While I disagree w/the position here, it is, at least in part, the job of the Councillor to represent their constituent's wishes.
It's equally true that they ought to defend good public policy, from time to time, even when that isn't popular.
But that's easier said than done. It's also a good way to get un-elected. I admire politicians who are prepared to risk their careers for good public policy.
But they are far and few between.

Does this proposal stand a chance if the developer removed a floor from the lower section? It could still look quite elegant at 12 floors and would fit the city's defintion of midrise?

Or is council and the nimbyfolk so dead set on destroying this that we'll see the land sold and some ugly contemporary glass condo eventually replace it?

If council says no, it would be a shock if this doesn't go to LPAT.

****

What the area residents want and what is economically viable on the site are probably not something that can be resolved harmoniously.
The issue here is not really the design aesthetic, it's height and tapering. I suspect (but don't know) that the developer may be willing to move a bit on these issues as that is commonly the case.
However, I doubt the neighbours would be happy to settle for that.
Time will tell.
 
Last edited:

isaidso

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
1,795
Reaction score
1,542
Arrrggghhh! This is one of those excruciatingly frustrating examples of NIMBYism gone mad. This whole stretch of Yonge will be mid-rises. This is a massive win for the neighbourhood and only 13 floors. I sense that nothing over 4 floors is going to make these people happy. Hopefully, common sense prevails and this moves forward largely unchanged.

Having to negotiate with people like that must be maddening. I'm glad I don't have to do it.
 
Last edited:

ProjectEnd

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
11,378
Reaction score
20,152
We did, they're just called the LPAT.



The Councillor has as much influence as any other. While I disagree w/the position here, it is, at least in part, the job of the Councillor to represent their constituent's wishes.
It's equally true that they ought to defend good public policy, from time to time, even when that isn't popular.
But that's easier said than done. It's also a good way to get un-elected. I admire politicians who are prepared to risk their careers for good public policy.
But they are far and few between.



If council says no, it would be a shock if this doesn't go to LPAT.

****

What the area residents want and what is economically viable on the site are probably not something that can be resolved harmoniously.
The issue here is not really the design aesthetic, it's height and tapering. I suspect (but don't know) that the developer may be willing to move a bit on these issues as that is commonly the case.
However, I doubt the neighbours would be happy to settle for that.
Time will tell.
OLT, as of Friday last week. ;)
 

Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
14,607
Reaction score
27,813

Top