Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
31,243
Reaction score
87,402
Lobbying under way on this site; one first raised here by @LUVIT! over in The Poet thread here:


In my follow-up post, I offered this image from TO Maps:

1608911824602-png.290996


The Lobbyist Registry entry refers to 46R-52R as noted in the title above; but TO Maps continues to show these as having an unsevered 50 Laing in-between.

I assume, but don't know that this may be within an assembly.

For the purposes of estimating size size, I have assumed a severance of 50 Laing in line with the property to the north:

1642707211713.png


The site area shown is ~2000m2 or about 21,000ft2
 
thread here :)


Thanks; I discounted that one (for now), because if you look at the Preliminary Report, the Oben Flats proposal specifically excludes the 'R' properties.

But they certainly could be linked.

From the report:

1642707921965.png
 
Formal submission to the City is now in the AIC.

Slightly different composition than I imagined above as its 46-52R & 50-52 Laing.

2 buildings, 7s and 4s.

Arch: Gabriel Fain


1675424110683.png

North Elevation: (looking across Maple Leaf Forever Park, which this proposal would front on the south side)


1675424336691.png

1675424374441.png

1675424452269.png

1675424490378.png



1675424530596.png



1675424203103.png


1675424247792.png


1675424277551.png



1675424588255.png
 
Last edited:
Personally hate perforated balcony guards... Sugar Wharf gets a pass for a better than expected result, despite (substantial) initial derision.

Given me some wrought-iron (usually faux) green balcony guards here... would look great on the building.
 
The scale is great, and though some of the details aren't exactly thrilling (colour scheme as suggested in the renders and yes, the perforations), this is still something to look forward to. It will be good to get more urban intensification in this stretch of Queen East/Eastern Avenue.
 
I do not mind the scale but do not really like the look or the colours. I would also prefer more distance between the north side facing Maple Leaf park for trees and/or foliage. I assume there will also be fencing of some sort and not direct access to the park..
Shading on the park may also be an issue due to the fact that most or all of the trees along the southern edge of the park are on this property and will be removed. It appears that the southern edge will have' townhomes' with a walkway. I do not see any trees along this length either.
 
I do not mind the scale but do not really like the look or the colours. I would also prefer more distance between the north side facing Maple Leaf park for trees and/or foliage. I assume there will also be fencing of some sort and not direct access to the park..
Shading on the park may also be an issue due to the fact that most or all of the trees along the southern edge of the park are on this property and will be removed. It appears that the southern edge will have' townhomes' with a walkway. I do not see any trees along this length either.

The intent of the design as proposed is that there will not be a fence. They are aiming to make the private property seem like a seemless part of the park and vice versa.
 
I wonder if the City can buy those houses to expand the park.

Are you meaning 56 and 58 Laing? Sure, they could buy/expropriate them.

They already own one home 'Maple Cottage' which is a community space; and they bought and demo'ed one other to create an entrance to the park from Laing.

Not sure another 2 homes would make a huge difference to the quality of the space.
 
Apart from the tacky hanging gardens of babylon greenwashing, it's quite a refined and sophisticated proposal, sensitive to the surrounding context too!
 
Spot the "hold-outs"...

1675776018166.png
 
Spot the "hold-outs"...

View attachment 454658

If you're thinking that the yellow area are hold outs, you're not correct.

They sold, but it's a separate development with its own thread:

 
If you're thinking that the yellow area are hold outs, you're not correct.

They sold, but it's a separate development with its own thread:

Willing to place a side bet that those 2 projects merge at some point..? 🤓

I don't see how the 4-storey / 7-unit project as a stand-alone makes sense financially any more in 2023.
 

Back
Top