ProjectEnd
Superstar
3C is a massive project with many moving parts. Do not connect the lack of 'news' to a lack of progress on the design / file.
- Thread starter AlvinofDiaspar
- Start date
TCB89
New Member
Unfortunately, no.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Claude Cormier also responsible for the 3C site plan? In his presentation he kept emphasizing the importance of enclosing the south side of Trinity St. to turn it into an actual square - so I'd be curious to see if/how the proposed connection under the rail tracks fits with that.
TCB89
New Member
Back to the drawing board? From Pam McConnell yesterday:
Dear Neighbours,
Thank you to all who participated in recent public consultations on the development proposal for the Distillery area Triangle Lands, and the proposed Official Plan Amendment on shadowing of Trinity Square.
During these meetings, I heard support from residents for public realm improvements associated with the proposal, the replacement of surface parking with pedestrian walkways, new grade related retail, weather protection and a more sheltered Trinity Square. There was no agreement on the scale and density of the tower. There were concerns regarding traffic, replacement of public parking, provision of family sized units, green development standards, and the impact of the development podium on the Case Goods heritage building.
Following these consultations, the developers met with City Planning and stated they are willing to work on changes and respond to issues raised by the community and staff. The developer and Planning teams will be convening working sessions in the coming weeks to review options
Should City staff determine that any new proposals are appropriate to bring forward to the community, a new public meeting will be scheduled to present the options. In addition, the development committee of the Gooderham & Worts Neighbourhood Association will be consulted through this process to ensure community issues continue to be raised.
Tomorrow on Wednesday February 18th, a staff report with recommendations on the Official Plan Amendment regarding shadowing will be before Toronto and East York Community Council.
Given that discussions on the application have now been initiated that include reviewing this issue, and that the developer has agreed to not proceed to an appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board at this time, I have determined in consultation with City Planning staff that I will move adjournment (deferal) of the statutory meeting on this report. The meeting will be rescheduled and new notice given once results of discussions with planning and the developer are known. Residents who intended to depute at the meeting tomorrow may wish to wait until a new meeting is scheduled, as only one deputation is allowed per statutory meeting.
As well, I am aware that notification for the public meeting on the development application did not reach 33 Mill St. That error has been corrected. Some residents were able to attend on short notice and provided strong feedback. At this time, I am recommending that a new meeting be convened when a revised proposal comes forward, so not to base feedback on an out of date proposal. Residents can consult the City Planning Portal for the application which has all background reports and copies of the presentations from the meeting, and speak to Planning staff to get further information.
http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=73d3881dd2ba7410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD
I believe that the discussions that are moving ahead allow us an opportunity to reach a solution in our neighbourhood, and not have it imposed by the OMB.
Sincerely,
Pam McConnell
Deputy Mayor
Councillor, Ward 28
Dear Neighbours,
Thank you to all who participated in recent public consultations on the development proposal for the Distillery area Triangle Lands, and the proposed Official Plan Amendment on shadowing of Trinity Square.
During these meetings, I heard support from residents for public realm improvements associated with the proposal, the replacement of surface parking with pedestrian walkways, new grade related retail, weather protection and a more sheltered Trinity Square. There was no agreement on the scale and density of the tower. There were concerns regarding traffic, replacement of public parking, provision of family sized units, green development standards, and the impact of the development podium on the Case Goods heritage building.
Following these consultations, the developers met with City Planning and stated they are willing to work on changes and respond to issues raised by the community and staff. The developer and Planning teams will be convening working sessions in the coming weeks to review options
Should City staff determine that any new proposals are appropriate to bring forward to the community, a new public meeting will be scheduled to present the options. In addition, the development committee of the Gooderham & Worts Neighbourhood Association will be consulted through this process to ensure community issues continue to be raised.
Tomorrow on Wednesday February 18th, a staff report with recommendations on the Official Plan Amendment regarding shadowing will be before Toronto and East York Community Council.
Given that discussions on the application have now been initiated that include reviewing this issue, and that the developer has agreed to not proceed to an appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board at this time, I have determined in consultation with City Planning staff that I will move adjournment (deferal) of the statutory meeting on this report. The meeting will be rescheduled and new notice given once results of discussions with planning and the developer are known. Residents who intended to depute at the meeting tomorrow may wish to wait until a new meeting is scheduled, as only one deputation is allowed per statutory meeting.
As well, I am aware that notification for the public meeting on the development application did not reach 33 Mill St. That error has been corrected. Some residents were able to attend on short notice and provided strong feedback. At this time, I am recommending that a new meeting be convened when a revised proposal comes forward, so not to base feedback on an out of date proposal. Residents can consult the City Planning Portal for the application which has all background reports and copies of the presentations from the meeting, and speak to Planning staff to get further information.
http://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/contentonly?vgnextoid=73d3881dd2ba7410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD
I believe that the discussions that are moving ahead allow us an opportunity to reach a solution in our neighbourhood, and not have it imposed by the OMB.
Sincerely,
Pam McConnell
Deputy Mayor
Councillor, Ward 28
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Thanks for the posting - by the presentation I am not sure if the applicant made a good case for a tower that is significantly above and beyond the recent towers in the area. The so called contribution is fairly mundane given the ask, and closing off the possibility of a connection south along Trinity is pretty terrible.
AoD
AoD
ProjectEnd
Superstar
I disagree. First off, 40m is not 'significantly above and beyond the recent towers in the area.' Taller? Certainly. Significantly taller? Hardly. What's more, the public realm seems pretty excellent and the tower's effects are largely mitigated by the wide canopy and dynamic podium composition. There's also nothing to suggest that the connection under the tracks was anything more than an idea batted out to Cityzen and others in the 3C group. There's certainly no indication from the city documentation that such a proposal has been presented to them. Furthermore, a this plan indicates, the two proposals are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
Attachments
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Applicant Presentation from Jan:
http://www1.toronto.ca/City Of Toro...pdf/31R Parliament Applicant Presentation.pdf
And yes, Claude Cormier is the landscape architect for the project it would seem.
AoD
http://www1.toronto.ca/City Of Toro...pdf/31R Parliament Applicant Presentation.pdf
And yes, Claude Cormier is the landscape architect for the project it would seem.
AoD
Attachments
ThomasJ
Active Member
who is the developer/owner?
Cityscape and DREAM, the same as the rest of The Distillery District.
42
42
ThomasJ
Active Member
thanks - I see title has been updated now.
modernizt
Senior Member
I like the reflecting pool for Trinity Square. Not entirely sure how I feel about the rest of this project yet. The materials will be key. I like the aA podiums in the area but feel like a Saucier+Perrotte approach (corten, wood, abstract geometry) as for their hotel proposal nearby (which was unfortunately rejected) would be perfect here.
adHominem
Senior Member
I double-like it if it replaces the sculpture that's currently there.
ProjectEnd
Superstar
The hotel was never 'rejected' per se, merely not pushed forward past the initial application.
Mongo
Senior Member
I thought that the Design Review Panel, despite acknowledging the design as "world-class", recommended against it on the grounds of it being out of scale with its surroundings?
DSC
Superstar
ProjectEnd
Superstar
Nothing the DRP says is legally binding, especially when it comes to issues of building size and zoning. Even if planning recommended against the application, the proponent could appeal the matter to the OMB.