The massing drawings above, posted by @Paclo suggest some trouble for this one. It's a bit non-contextual for Davenport, and the area to the south is all lowrise.

I take no issue w/the height here, and there are nearby precedents, but the height of the podium may well be an issue; and whether the site is actually large enough to do what its attempting is a real question.
 
Generally with lesser quality and lesser consistency, and a streetscape sorely lacking by comparison to the Grand Boulevards of Paris.

The public realm could always use some work. 🥲

(Further west, Davenport & Bedford)

20200516_071814-jpg.245889
 
  • Haha
Reactions: xy3
I take no issue w/the height here, and there are nearby precedents, but the height of the podium may well be an issue; and whether the site is actually large enough to do what it's attempting is a real question.

Agree on the podium height, but disagree on the overall height. Midblock, abutting low rise neighbourhood, should not allow for a "tower". I would guess the city and the planner on file are OK with it, which means the neighbours, if they want to fight this, will be in for an expensive battle, which in the end would maybe only yield 2 storeys knocked off and slightly lower podium. Likely not worth the $150k in professional fees to take to OLT.

I know there's a push for more density in this area, but I really hope the city doesn't screw up one of the truly historical low-rise areas in the city worth protecting. Ditto for Cabbagetown.
 
Agree on the podium height, but disagree on the overall height. Midblock, abutting low rise neighbourhood, should not allow for a "tower". I would guess the city and the planner on file are OK with it, which means the neighbours, if they want to fight this, will be in for an expensive battle, which in the end would maybe only yield 2 storeys knocked off and slightly lower podium. Likely not worth the $150k in professional fees to take to OLT.

I know there's a push for more density in this area, but I really hope the city doesn't screw up one of the truly historical low-rise areas in the city worth protecting. Ditto for Cabbagetown.
Why not look at things more holistically instead of focusing solely on height ?

Screwing the historic low rise areas would mean the developer is hiring an architect to create an out-of-place bargain basement contemporary design ; rife with nonsense like mismatched spandrel, copius mullions, randomly staggered balconies, cantilevers, and exposed concrete or V shaped columns. Wengle Architect designs are the opposite, and showcase clean designs with a respectful nod to pre war tradition.

By the way, the Bedford Condo just a block away (also on the south side of Davenport) will be of comparable height.

If you're against 16 stories on streets like Davenport, then you should put an asterix and say you also oppose immigration to Toronto, unless you support fueling the housing shortage and hot real estate market.
 
Why not look at things more holistically instead of focusing solely on height ?

Screwing the historic low rise areas would mean the developer is hiring an architect to create an out-of-place bargain basement contemporary design ; rife with nonsense like mismatched spandrel, copius mullions, randomly staggered balconies, cantilevers, and exposed concrete or V shaped columns. Wengle Architect designs are the opposite, and showcase clean designs with a respectful nod to pre war tradition.

There is certainly much worse than Wengle out there; but I do think you're being a bit kinder than merited. I'm more fond of well done historicist nods than many here..........I'm very borderline on Wengle's delivery.

VE'ing aside, we rarely see comprehensive use of real limestone where the design being emulated would indicate such.

There's also the matter of repetitiveness and lack of contextual appropriateness.

By the way, the Bedford Condo just a block away (also on the south side of Davenport) will be of comparable height.

If you're against 16 stories on streets like Davenport, then you should put an asterix and say you also oppose immigration to Toronto, unless you support fueling the housing shortage and hot real estate market.

Ok now, I personally didn't find the 16 storeys a problem per se; I do have some concerns over massing, and whether the form here is really feasible in light of site constraints. Be that as it may.........

I think its entirely possible to have a view that not every site/street is appropriate for height w/o having to equate that with wider politics.

For the record, on that point, I am for curtailing immigration, primarily foreign students/TFWs, but also, temporarily, points-based immigrants, until housing can catch up to population growth that has already occurred. As it follows to me, then when in a hole, one as a first measure, should stop digging.

That said, lets not link every view, on every development to broader politics, we have political threads for that.
 
It's subject to personal opinion. The last word I would use to describe a Wengle design is clean. He's a breath of fresh air to Shane Baghai (note: developer) Wengle's mid rise designs still have an overwrought McMansionism. The massing is always off point. Wengle's best are the oversized Bridle Path homes that established the firm's name.
 
It's not political. It's just a catchphrase for a taller is always better theology. It would be dropped immediately if proven that immigration was instead impeding new construction like city planning does
 
Last edited:
I don't consider the housing shortage and housing bubble to be a political issue. It's both an economic and urbanist one. You don't have to be on the far left to be critical of policies that stimulate demand while constricting supply. These same policies kill urban vibrancy. When most people are spending the majority of their income on housing, theres less money left over to patronize local businesses.

If you care about the vibrancy of low rise areas, you should be more concerned with the parasitic nature of "the property ladder" artificially stimulated by post 2008 governments/BOC/CMHC, and rents rising above inflation; the shuttering and hours reductions of urban retail offerings and the drain /drying up of most other sectors outside of real estate.

I think you mean the theology that taller is better would be dropped if new immigration and students/TFWs was required to be redirected to the prairie provinces, Northern Ontario and/or Windsor instead, which is a fair point.

But the notion that "luxury developments are separate from the housing crisis" is pure nonsense and wishful thinking. When there is a lack of luxury supply, luxury buyers will turn to upper middle class developments or do flips and/or bid up the prices of entry level and mid market units.

I personally wouldnt like to see 40 stories of windowwall-clad condos (like The Social condos etc) on Davenport, but due to land values no one would buy an $900,000 entry level 1 bedroom condo. So it's somthing unlikely to materialize. The buyer in the market for a $900,000 condo and smart money will be be more selective. Moreover, we only have seen significant height on the north side of Davenport thus far.

Some kind of Davenport/Upper Yorkville BIA with sidewalk widening/installation of planters /trees/benches and burying of utilities unfortunately probably wont materialize in my lifetime.
 
Last edited:
Some kind of Davenport/Upper Yorkville BIA with sidewalk widening/installation of planters /trees/benches and burying of utilities unfortunately probably wont materialize in my lifetime.
Absolutely, I had not realized until taking a look at the proposal site that Davenport is six lanes wide in this stretch. Traffic engineering from the Church street extension of the 20th century I assume. Considering the whole 6 lane stretch is so close to rapid transit a slimming down to a more typical 4 lane street with widened sidewalks and cycle tracks is needed as the street transitions from low rise commercial to high density residential.
 
I have no issue with Wengle or the overall design. I just think some low rise neighbourhoods have more value historically and aesthetically than others. For me, the Annex & Cabbagetown fall into that category. Every major city with some history will have neighbourhoods worth protecting. I'm not saying don't build on Davenport. I just think the height is too much for mid-block. Yes, the Bedford just down the road is of similar height, but it's not mid-block. BTW, if you look at the applicant's block context plan, their are indicating 18 storeys for the southeast corner of Ave & Dav. I would have no issue with that being 20+ storeys as that site (immediately adjacent) would have less impact to the neighbourhood to the south than this one.
 
I have no issue with Wengle or the overall design. I just think some low rise neighbourhoods have more value historically and aesthetically than others. For me, the Annex & Cabbagetown fall into that category. Every major city with some history will have neighbourhoods worth protecting. I'm not saying don't build on Davenport. I just think the height is too much for mid-block. Yes, the Bedford just down the road is of similar height, but it's not mid-block. BTW, if you look at the applicant's block context plan, their are indicating 18 storeys for the southeast corner of Ave & Dav. I would have no issue with that being 20+ storeys as that site (immediately adjacent) would have less impact to the neighbourhood to the south than this one.
What impact does anything on Davenport have on the neighbourhood to the south?
 

Community Consultation Meeting for 245-247 Davenport Road


Wednesday, May 8, 2024 6:00 PM - 7:30 PM
(UTC-04:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada)

Register for webinar

If you want to attend, register now. When your registration is approved, you'll receive an invitation to join the webinar.

Agenda

6 p.m. - Introductions
6:10 p.m. - City Planning and Applicant Presentations
6:40 p.m.- Discussion
7:25 p.m. - Next Steps
 

Back
Top