YIMBY519

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 7, 2019
Messages
65
Reaction score
122
I forgot to mention that half of the Canadian Tire "lands" is owned by an individual (east half, including most of the physical store) and leased to Canadian Tire, while the Canadian Tire Corporation owns most of the parking lot on the west side. This is a major wrinkle to a potential redevelopment here and maybe why it's not a larger Master Plan. We'll see when the docs come in.
 

egotrippin

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 8, 2007
Messages
2,226
Reaction score
325
And roads as well, there will be a road along the southern edge of this site and 50% of the ROW will come out of the CT site's land. Same on the western side where the driveway is now, that will be a public road. At least, those are the plans in the Main St. Planning Study, we will have to see what the applicant has in mind.

Here's the image from the Study:

You can see, in the upper image, You have the Red line for the new public roads, and the green square is a the park.
That is helpful, thanks for that.
 

whatever

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 25, 2007
Messages
2,763
Reaction score
662
Are we too far down the road now to reopen the conversation about the Danforth GO and community centre? I kind of understood some of the rationale for not doing something at the bottom of Dawes, but it seems like insanity to not do something at the bottom of the new N/S road.

I'd be totally fine with this being much, much more dense if we could get the enhanced GO connection and maybe a pedestrian/bike connection over to the park on the south side.
 

Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
16,551
Reaction score
35,263
Are we too far down the road now to reopen the conversation about the Danforth GO and community centre? I kind of understood some of the rationale for not doing something at the bottom of Dawes, but it seems like insanity to not do something at the bottom of the new N/S road.

I'd be totally fine with this being much, much more dense if we could get the enhanced GO connection and maybe a pedestrian/bike connection over to the park on the south side.

PF&R will be looking for a new CRC (recreation centre) here. The existing facility, though relatively new, doesn't even have a gym!

The issue w/the previous proposal was it encroaching into the railway crash zone.
I'm not sure why a crash-wall isn't sufficient/wasn't proposed, but that's the reason for it being nixed.

Presumably that would an issue anywhere here directly abutting the corridor.
 

maestro

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
7,205
Reaction score
2,127
The transit connections justifies higher densities but this is well beyond reason. We've become so accustomed to 50 storey towers everywhere. That doesn't make it an ideal affordable alternative or one that offers a high quality of life. It makes sense in a downtown with all the available amenities. It doesn't make sense here. You are totally disrupting a stable neighbourhood ecosystem introducing all these units with development that adds 350 square metres of commercial space with 75,000 square metres residential. It's possible I missed space for a school among the half dozen proposal. A suburban subdivision with fewer units will have space for a school. This is just land owners cashing in on the proximity to a transit hub and the housing market without really providing the tools for self sufficiency and success.

The expanding transit capacities underway will be at crush levels in no time with oriented master plans where everyone is forced to commute.
 

Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
16,551
Reaction score
35,263
The transit connections justifies higher densities but this is well beyond reason. We've become so accustomed to 50 storey towers everywhere. That doesn't make it an ideal affordable alternative or one that offers a high quality of life. It makes sense in a downtown with all the available amenities. It doesn't make sense here. You are totally disrupting a stable neighbourhood ecosystem introducing all these units with development that adds 350 square metres of commercial space with 75,000 square metres residential. It's possible I missed space for a school among the half dozen proposal. A suburban subdivision with fewer units will have space for a school. This is just land owners cashing in on the proximity to a transit hub and the housing market without really providing the tools for self sufficiency and success.

The expanding transit capacities underway will be at crush levels in no time with oriented master plans where everyone is forced to commute.

There is currently no firm proposal for a new school among any of the sites in the Main-Dawes block.

Existing schools nearby are at, or over capacity, notably Secord ES with a 18-room portapack already grafted on to the building.

There is a new school contemplated at the 411 Victoria Park site (Gerrard Prairie); what we have yet to see, and may not see for awhile yet..........Riocan's Shoppers World will also be in play at some point.

But it's not at the top of Riocan's list (it is on it)....so it may be a couple of years behind what's currently public.
 

Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
16,551
Reaction score
35,263
*docs are up*

Arch Plans are thin, very clear though, this is not the full footprint of the site.

Architect is RAW

Proponent is: Tri-Metro Investments Inc.,

FSI: 13.41

Unit Count: 1139

Parking Count: 360

1637081157732.png


1637081180803.png


1637081215528.png



From the Planning Rationale Report:

1637081448333.png


Outline of the proponent's portion of the CT lands:

1637081544343.png
 

NorthshoreCity

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 5, 2011
Messages
116
Reaction score
362
City:
Boston
I agree with @ushahid, are Festival Condos in Vaughan becoming the new CTRL+C, CTRL+V design in the GTA similar to the legacy of Casa?

Height is 177.6M to the roof of the 55 storey tower, looks like another CTBUH defined skyscraper is on the proposal list for Toronto. At the rate that 150M+ skyscrapers are being proposed in Toronto, the city is on track to eventually overtake NYC for number of skyscrapers within the next 25-35 years. That said, due to the sprawl of where these skyscrapers are located it'll be a much longer period before the density aligns with that of NYC.
 

Bjays92

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 9, 2020
Messages
891
Reaction score
2,486
I agree with @ushahid, are Festival Condos in Vaughan becoming the new CTRL+C, CTRL+V design in the GTA similar to the legacy of Casa?

Height is 177.6M to the roof of the 55 storey tower, looks like another CTBUH defined skyscraper is on the proposal list for Toronto. At the rate that 150M+ skyscrapers are being proposed in Toronto, the city is on track to eventually overtake NYC for number of skyscrapers within the next 25-35 years. That said, due to the sprawl of where these skyscrapers are located it'll be a much longer period before the density aligns with that of NYC.
On the other hand it may make Toronto feel bigger than New York, because every time you think you're leaving the city you run into more clusters of massive buildings.

Downtown, Yorkville, Midtown, North York, Vaughn CC, East Harbour, Garrison Point, HBS, Eglinton Terrace, MCC, Sherway Gardens, and so on. So many clusters of very tall buildings in the pipeline. Even if the density doesnt match, as far as the eye can see there will be mini skylines and towers dotting the horizon.
 

Top