If you want to restrict a booming city to midrise, then it has to be midrise everywhere. That is what makes Paris work. But in Toronto we allow rich homeowners to hoard 75% (?) of the City's land area as Neighbourhoods (the so-called "traditional single family neighbourhoods") which means the population growth is forced into very small areas near transit and growth centres, at huge heights and density. That's the tradeoff. Toronto cannot protect the Neighbourhoods while also preserving a midrise character in the centres and on key streets/
For sure, i get that, I appraise development land for a living, so I understand how much increasing land values due to scarcity of supply are affecting developer's pro forma calcs. I am all good with moving in to the yellowbelts slowly. I do think all population growth shouldn't be centred in growth centres only though, and if it is to be that way, I hope the trend to build in other growth centres outside of Yonge and Eg and downtown, start receiving a larger share of the burden.
 
If you want to restrict a booming city to midrise, then it has to be midrise everywhere. That is what makes Paris work. But in Toronto we allow rich homeowners to hoard 75% (?) of the City's land area as Neighbourhoods (the so-called "traditional single family neighbourhoods") which means the population growth is forced into very small areas near transit and growth centres, at huge heights and density. That's the tradeoff. Toronto cannot protect the Neighbourhoods while also preserving a midrise character in the centres and on key streets/
It is possible to build fairly low-rise neighbourhoods that are dense. We build massive roads and setbacks that waste a great deal of space.
 
I do think mid-rise has to be permitted along all major roads (arterials and collectors), as-of-right.
I'm not sure this is right. Roads should be roads, streets should be streets. Piling a bunch of people on busy arterials leads to stroads. And it is not pleasant to live on high volume car roads.
 
I'm not sure this is right. Roads should be roads, streets should be streets. Piling a bunch of people on busy arterials leads to stroads. And it is not pleasant to live on high volume car roads.

That need not be the case.

That's about modal shares, and also the density of the streetgrid.

Worth noting mid-rise has quite the range to it; it need not mean 11-storey, jam-packed density; it could be 5-7 storey, transitional/angular at the rear with large sized units.
 
Heard through the grapevines that the Beddington's store is closing sometime soon along the horizon as staff have been notified to consider looking for alternate employment.
 
I'd like to see an omission of that big expanse curtainwall and utilitarian concrete columns on the north tower. Make it look like the south tower.
 
1640912187577.png


No permits in for the other properties yet.
 
This site is excellent for a high-rise development; however, many existing single detached homeowners may be against the proposal especially with the same old excuse "it does not fit with the neighbourhood characteristic" just watch and see. Especially, those who lived in Yonge and Eglinton for many decades may feel "NIBYM-ism"
Good thing we have a policy based planning system and this was approved at the Ontario Land Tribunal. NIMBYs can whine but planning prevails.
 
Can't wait to see this development happen! It reminds me of the Mirvish Village development on Bloor and Bathurst. All different styles of solid looking cladding around the windows. With a rustic redish, orange precast and tan coloured panelling etc. Instead of the basic blue, green, and white style cladding as seen in the thumbnail photo box on the very top !
 
I guess when it comes to demos, not all buildings effected need to be done right away. As I can equally guess when it comes to excavation though, all buildings will need to be cleared out save for any heritage components.
 

Back
Top