doublestandard
New Member
anyone know how much this site sold for
- Thread starter AlbertC
- Start date
YIMBY519
Active Member
YIMBY519
Active Member
This site has similar characteristics as the Gerrard Street Beer Store redevelopment without the local resident group and organization of Cabbagetown. The City will dig in on this proposal, and it will likely not settle for more than 8 storeys. It will be interesting to see if the developer will pursue a full LPAT hearing and go for the full 10. This scale works well on the edge of Downtown, but this will be a difficult file. We'll pick this up in 2023 and see if they get 8 or 10 storeys.
Tim1234
Active Member
Too funny
oreoshack
Active Member
They should PAY developers to build in this area. Jesus it looks like a bomb went off at Dundas and Sherbourne. Shell-shocked people roaming around looking lost and dazed. I feel uncomfortable even driving through that intersection after dark.
Towered
Superstar
Even during the day I do!
timtripp
New Member
Hey Mike, it's not that bad. The tunnel is fixed. We got a new property management company, and they're replacing the roof as I type this... Someone brought up the notion of selling the building again at our last AGM. Never gonna happen.
radioheadmike
Active Member
Hey Tim. That's great news! I do miss living there. I hope everything gets sorted out as it is a gorgeous building and community. But considering the Strip club/Hotel down the road sold for a killing, it won't hurt to have that option if it ever comes to it
artyboy123
Senior Member
New renderings are updated in the database! The renderings are taken from the architectural plan via the Site Plan Approval application.
The building height changed from 39.35m to 38.35m, both unit count and parking count changes. The unit count went from 92 units to 88 units and the parking count went from 37 to 41.
The building height changed from 39.35m to 38.35m, both unit count and parking count changes. The unit count went from 92 units to 88 units and the parking count went from 37 to 41.
Last edited:
AlbertC
Superstar
Looks alright, although beige on darker beige is a bit staid. However, iirc Plaza Partners are still continuous exploring options on whether to keep or sell this site so further changes may be expected along the way.
AlbertC
Superstar
artyboy123
Senior Member
New renderings are updated in the database! The only project information is updated in the database. The total unit count increased from 88 units to 98 units. The total parking space count decreased from 41 parking spaces to 19 parking spaces.
The rendering is taken from the architectural plan via Site Plan Approval
The rendering is taken from the architectural plan via Site Plan Approval
AlbertC
Superstar
Northern Light
Superstar
This is exceedingly bland.
Its a curious thing. The materials aren't terrible, the overall scale/density is just fine, but the details are off.
****
We need to talk to developers (and Planning) in this City..........limited overhangs/cantilevers rarely work.
If you want a colonnade, go for it, preferably with other area developments joining in for a coordinated look.
But this business of lets just slight over hang the lower levels, in a way that doesn't really add weather protection, nor create an architectural feature, is actually an architectural determent.
I also do not get the routine use of over-height ground floors when this is out of step w/the area, particularly for residential builds.
I get why supermarkets or the like would appreciate 12ft-18ft ceilings.
But routinely, the areas we all love for a retail stroll, Yorkville, Roncy, Queen West are mostly 8ft/9ft ground floors.
10+ when that's out of step w/the area just stands out like a sore thumb.
You can do that, if you're building a 'look-at-me' showpiece for an area, but for a background building it just doesn't work.
*****
This is just one block west and provides two contrasting examples of what a podium could look like (need not reference historical vibe)
Here, in both a Victoria-era retail building, and a early to mid 20thC industrial building we both see low ground floors. They both work, in different ways.
Both use detailing to convey this is the top of the building/lower levels. This weird idea that if something juts out that's akin to a cornice or detailing........makes no sense to me; it's not the same at all.
It's lazy and inconsiderate architecture.
Here, it's both acontextual and also anti-intimate. Ugh.
BDPQ are one of the City's better firms, but they have their off days, and this proposal represents one of them.
Its a curious thing. The materials aren't terrible, the overall scale/density is just fine, but the details are off.
****
We need to talk to developers (and Planning) in this City..........limited overhangs/cantilevers rarely work.
If you want a colonnade, go for it, preferably with other area developments joining in for a coordinated look.
But this business of lets just slight over hang the lower levels, in a way that doesn't really add weather protection, nor create an architectural feature, is actually an architectural determent.
I also do not get the routine use of over-height ground floors when this is out of step w/the area, particularly for residential builds.
I get why supermarkets or the like would appreciate 12ft-18ft ceilings.
But routinely, the areas we all love for a retail stroll, Yorkville, Roncy, Queen West are mostly 8ft/9ft ground floors.
10+ when that's out of step w/the area just stands out like a sore thumb.
You can do that, if you're building a 'look-at-me' showpiece for an area, but for a background building it just doesn't work.
*****
This is just one block west and provides two contrasting examples of what a podium could look like (need not reference historical vibe)
Here, in both a Victoria-era retail building, and a early to mid 20thC industrial building we both see low ground floors. They both work, in different ways.
Both use detailing to convey this is the top of the building/lower levels. This weird idea that if something juts out that's akin to a cornice or detailing........makes no sense to me; it's not the same at all.
It's lazy and inconsiderate architecture.
Here, it's both acontextual and also anti-intimate. Ugh.
BDPQ are one of the City's better firms, but they have their off days, and this proposal represents one of them.
DSC
Superstar
How do these pics differ from the ones you posted in May?