I much prefer what’s there now. It’s nice to have some texture and playfulness, unlike the monolithic proposal.
Fully agreed. This is one of the nicest buildings to walk along this stretch of Yonge Street. The mid-rise built-form, ornamental buildings, and restaurant patios provide one of the most "European" street aesthetics in the city. I don't care if it is inauthentic PoMo or not, it achieves the desired effect of making me feel proud of walking through this city.

To replace that with this architectural dreck is unfortunate.
 
That said, the industry is extremely taxed for labour supply and I'm not convinced that if you abolished zoning entirely tomorrow we would see a material increase in unit construction.
Maybe true. Let's find out by opening the regulatory taps. I think we will see the market respond. The idea that we shouldn't try to fix one part of the problem, because another part of the problem might still remain, doesn't make sense to me. You have to attack the problem from all angles until it is under control. That includes making it legal to build apartments in more places again.
 
This is a red herring. 469 new homes with no new car parking steps from the subway is a huge win for the climate in the long run. This is exactly the kind of infill urban development that is critical to reducing transportation emissions (the number one contributor to climate change) and also reducing operating emissions per home (apartment emissions are well lower per home on average than single family homes, towns, etc.).

Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good
Climate? Steps to an overcrowded subway, with minimal services. Y&SC is bereft of the fun and attraction it once had long ago. If you want subway line, how about the unused Line 4? Also, Canada is completely culprit in Climate change. You've not addressed any potential solutions other than 'screw the people'. So that Climate Change argument is laughable.

6 million people and everybody wants to live downtown.
 
Don't see it that often, but this one managed to get an outright Refusal Report from planning; coming to the next meeting of TEYCC:


From the above:

1680272757869.png

1680272809064.png

1680272845181.png

1680272867884.png
 
This one wandered off to the OLT.

A settlement offer has been tendered. (confidential) ; heading to the next meeting of City Council.


New Plans were submitted to the OLT in January '24

Merit Hearing is coming up May 27th, 2024.
 
This one was before Council earlier this month, with a settlement offer. Said offer was adopted by Council.

@Paclo I will link to the docs below, w/the warning that most of the stats. in the Arch Plans are utterly illegible.

I, have it on good authority though that this one is approved at 49s.

The height in M is legible on the Site Plan:

1714150081260.png


Settlement Offer: https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2024/cc/bgrd/backgroundfile-244725.pdf

Arch Docs: https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2024/cc/bgrd/backgroundfile-244726.pdf

Summary of key changes:

Floor Plate got smaller, building got taller; some projecting balconies are gone, and there's a limiting distance agreement w/the cemetery in case they were thinking of moving any dead people for a new tower????

From the Settlement Offer:

1714150315929.png

1714150339718.png


1714150407494.png


1714150427201.png


* storey count amended in title, but M height is not.
 
Last edited:
The database statistics have been updated to reflect the settlement offer. Renderings remain from previous iteration.
 

Back
Top