Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
33,490
Reaction score
95,717
New to the AIC is this very large Application, 7 new towers, done as infill on a tower-in-the-park site just west of Yonge and south off of Steeles. (the property abuts Centrepoint Mall.

Site as is:

1680781368732.png


The northerly tower (foreground) would be demolished, with replacement rental units constructed, the southerly tower would be retained.

1680781257543.png



From the Docs:

1680781536985.png


1680781591483.png


1680781636006.png


1680781684326.png

1680781720293.png

1680781756577.png

1680781807837.png


1680781882708.png


1680781959587.png


1680782107708.png



Comments: What's to like? LOL The render certainly doesn't engender much hope for the visual appeal of this proposal. Additionally, the park dedication is 'leftover' land and should be refused. There is literally a large park proposed adjacent to this site, and a school yard to the immediate south. The parkland resources should go to make an existing or proposed park larger, rather than provided a small, non-functional park. Ideally, to me, they would work something out w/the proposal next door and enlarge their proposed park; though, to do that in a functional way would require some serious rigging of the site plan.

The nominal FSI is not ridiculous for the site, on paper, but those renders certainly give one the sense of an overly packed in proposal without good human scale.

Edit to add: 2 days in a row of 50s towers and no sign of @3Dementia, hmmm.
 
Last edited:
It looks like at least three towers from the this development will be above the 150m mark. With the highest one being over 182m having a total of proposed in the city of Toronto at 225 skyscrapers. And with the over all built, contsuction etc bringing total at 352 wow !
 
Last edited:
This looks DENSE.

On my read of the site plan, the proposed park is adjacent to the existing park (or school yard, haven't checked the property lines) and would represent an addition to it.

Visually, the design leaves something to be desired. But a positive of those nice rectangular floorplates should be some good, livable unit layouts.

Edit to add: based on the phasing, it looks like towers A + B could be completed before they demolish the existing tower. This should be a must, with the rental replacement units in one of those buildings, to cause the least possible disruption to existing tenants.
 
This looks DENSE.

On my read of the site plan, the proposed park is adjacent to the existing park (or school yard, haven't checked the property lines) and would represent an addition to it.

The park abuts the school yard to the south, but not the park proposed in the Centrepoint scheme.

The school yard will likely be separated from this site by an E-W road in all likihood, regardless, there would be a fence as there would be two different owners and the school site would not be public-access during school hours.

This is the layout of the Centrepoint proposal:

1680785753799.png


You can see a road will separate their park from this site. In addition, this proposal how towers between the proposed park here and the road located to the west, you can see that in the black squares on the left of the image.


Edit to add: based on the phasing, it looks like towers A + B could be completed before they demolish the existing tower. This should be a must, with the rental replacement units in one of those buildings, to cause the least possible disruption to existing tenants.

Tower D will contain the rental replacement units, which is phase 2. That would precede demolition of the existing tower which is phase 3.
 
I'm hoping the keep the matured trees. They are some of the nicest mature manicured trees that I've seen shockingly in the city.
 
Last edited:
I'm hoping the keep the matured trees. They are some of the nicest mature manicured trees that I seen shockingly in the city.

The vast majority of the trees would be removed in this proposal I count up to 19 that might be saved; that out of 109 trees on site.

The above is from the arborist report.
 
Hopefully the ones that align Steeles are saved.

Afraid Not:

203 – 212, and 217 - 220 will need to be removed to accommodate gradings works associated
with proposed streetscaping along Steeles Avenue West.
 

Back
Top