[AlbertC]

Meet virtually with Cisco Webex. Anytime, anywhere, on any device.

Simple, modern video meetings for everyone on the world's most popular and trusted collaboration platform.

toronto.webex.com

​

444-466 Eglinton Avenue West - Virtual Community Consultation Meeting​

Wednesday, February 28, 2024 6:30 PM - 8:00 PM
(UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada)

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

Host
Jairus Ballaret

Agenda
The City of Toronto Planning Division has received an application to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law in order to permit a 19 storey building including a 7 storey podium with retail on the ground floor fronting onto Eglinton Avenue West. A total of 185 new residential dwelling units are proposed. The total gross floor area (GFA) is 14,984 square metres, consisting of 14,565 square metres of residential GFA and 420 square metres of retail GFA on the ground floor.

Join us at the Virtual Community Consultation Meeting to participate in discussions on the application and have your say.

For further information on 444 – 466 Eglinton Ave West, please view the website at: www.toronto.ca/444EglintonAveW and review the materials before the meeting.

 

[AlbertC]

Tall purple-brick tower proposed for slice of low-rise Eglinton rankles residents

Residents in the Eglinton Avenue and Avenue Road area are expressing concerns regarding a proposed 19-storey condo development

streetsoftoronto.com

Rendering from the article:

Some folks in the area with a petition to try and limit this to 8 storeys:

Sign the Petition

Limit the proposed 19-storey condo at 444-466 Eglinton Ave W to 8-storeys

www.change.org

 

[christiesplits]

Some folks in the area with a petition to try and limit this to 8 storeys:

Sign the Petition

Limit the proposed 19-storey condo at 444-466 Eglinton Ave W to 8-storeys

www.change.org

I'm pretty sensitive to community concerns on development, particularly when it's a proposal that contrasts with the vernacular or scale of the area. Still, 19 storeys seems appropriate for a site that is on a main avenue, backing onto a large parking lot, and a stone's throw from a new transit station. Also, compare this project to the 30+ storey proposals along Eglinton between Laird and Mt Pleasant, and this proposal seems more than fair.

 

[Northern Light]

I'm pretty sensitive to community concerns on development, particularly when it's a proposal that contrasts with the vernacular or scale of the area. Still, 19 storeys seems appropriate for a site that is on a main avenue, backing onto a large parking lot, and a stone's throw from a new transit station. Also, compare this project to the 30+ storey proposals along Eglinton between Laird and Mt Pleasant, and this proposal seems more than fair.

While I broadly agree, I would call the 7-storey street wall here a jarring interruption of the status quo. *

In general, even where exceptional heights are merited, I tend to advise against going over 4 storeys for street walls. Its generally a bad visual to most people, and it tends to have adverse wind impacts.

* Note that the streetwall is not about the total height, but about the apparent height as exhibited by the outermost, lowest exterior walls.

 

[Cambry Ardship]

That design is not going to be disruptive. It's certainly not an "exceptional height" at seven stories. The densification of Eglinton is desperately needed.

 

[Paclo]

Appealed to the OLT

Case Information

 

[Northern Light]

Appeal Report to the next meeting of NYCC:

https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2024/ny/bgrd/backgroundfile-249438.pdf

The objections of staff mirror fairly closely what I wrote on the preceding page.

The applicant has not shown a required dedicated for the widening of the Eglinton ROW which would likely be used as sidewalk space here.

The applicant's proposed streetwall is too much.

By proposing a tall building, on a site where the Secondary Plan doesn't envision one......the bar is high........the proposal as masses does not meet the requirements of the Tall Building guidelines, particularly as it pertains to setbacks.

As the City is considering converting the adjacent Green P lot to a public park, shadowing is also a concern.