- Thread starter SpadinaBus
- Start date
yyzholocaust
New Member
Looking down to the "walkway" from an upper floor, March 8.
TheKingEast
Senior Member
Those lower units will be dark as hell and have no privacy.
yyzholocaust
New Member
Yep. Hope you like your curtains!
Views from the upper floors are decent.
Views from the upper floors are decent.
neuhaus
Senior Member
NBGtect
Active Member
Well isn't this just the most exciting news. Like, who needs another restaurant on this stretch anyway?
yyzholocaust
New Member
There oughta be a law...
Gphorce
Active Member
Yeah and there's a credit union in the western retail location. The sterilization continues.
WiddleBittyKitty
Felis catus
PSR's offices are likely on the second floor right behind the where the sign is, aren't they?
UD2
Active Member
You guys make it seem like the developer is intentionally robbing the area of a resturant.
I'm sure if the market/rent cost / space design made sense for a restaurant, then one would be there.
I'm sure if the market/rent cost / space design made sense for a restaurant, then one would be there.
milanista
Active Member
At least it's leased. It can't all be trendy restaurants and it's not like the area is wanting for that anyway. Also it's the kind of business that at least, in theory, would support the nearby restaurants and coffee shops with clients being entertained and whatnot.
I'd rather see PSR's current unit on Portland empty instead of this huge unit on King.
Anything is better than having it sit empty forever, like Minto King West at Tecumseth, where the corner unit has still not been leased and the west unit was only recently snapped up...by H&R Block.
I'd rather see PSR's current unit on Portland empty instead of this huge unit on King.
Anything is better than having it sit empty forever, like Minto King West at Tecumseth, where the corner unit has still not been leased and the west unit was only recently snapped up...by H&R Block.
maestro
Senior Member
Solaris
Senior Member
Typically Restaurants use generate a very high parking requirement via Zoning which few developers have appetite for
ProjectEnd
Superstar
How do you figure? In 569, 'Eating Establishments' in PA1, 2 and 3 have a minimum rate of 0 / 100sm GFA while retail stores have 1 / 100sm. 438 differentiates between 'restaurant' and 'take out restaurant' (per 109-88 and 425-93) but in both cases, the rate is still only 1 / 100sm. With these rates, how would a restaurant generate a higher parking requirement than another commercial use?
Solaris
Senior Member
This property remains in the former Toronto Zoning Bylaw 438-86 and not subject to the new provisions of Bylaw 569-2013.
In this particular case, it appears the site specific Bylaw 1116-2013 (amending 438-86) is silent on parking ratio requirements for each specific non-residential uses, but simply generalizes "a commercial parking garage is permitted below grade providing a maximum of 153 parking spaces on the lot".
My previous comment was pre-empted with 'typically' restaurants generate higher parking requirements (compared with other general commercial uses). This is consistent with City of Toronto's consultant report on this matter:
https://www1.toronto.ca/city_of_tor...__environment/files/pdf/ibi_phase1_report.pdf
In this particular case, it appears the site specific Bylaw 1116-2013 (amending 438-86) is silent on parking ratio requirements for each specific non-residential uses, but simply generalizes "a commercial parking garage is permitted below grade providing a maximum of 153 parking spaces on the lot".
My previous comment was pre-empted with 'typically' restaurants generate higher parking requirements (compared with other general commercial uses). This is consistent with City of Toronto's consultant report on this matter:
https://www1.toronto.ca/city_of_tor...__environment/files/pdf/ibi_phase1_report.pdf
2.3.2 RESTAURANT
Exhibit 2.7 summarizes restaurant parking standards where specified in the by-laws. The standards vary widely between by-laws as well as within the by-laws depending on the type of facility. Former East York has the highest parking standard at 21 spaces per 100 m2 of floor area, which probably assumes almost all patrons arrive by car. For take-out restaurants, the parking standard is generally lower, because of the high turnover of patrons, with the exception of former York.
Restaurant parking standards tend to vary widely depending on the type and size of facility. In general, the larger the restaurant is, the larger the parking ratio that is required. Some bylaws provide specific standards for take-out restaurants, as opposed to sit-down restaurants. Former York also distinguishes between restaurants with and without delivery service.
Exhibit 2.7 summarizes restaurant parking standards where specified in the by-laws. The standards vary widely between by-laws as well as within the by-laws depending on the type of facility. Former East York has the highest parking standard at 21 spaces per 100 m2 of floor area, which probably assumes almost all patrons arrive by car. For take-out restaurants, the parking standard is generally lower, because of the high turnover of patrons, with the exception of former York.
Restaurant parking standards tend to vary widely depending on the type and size of facility. In general, the larger the restaurant is, the larger the parking ratio that is required. Some bylaws provide specific standards for take-out restaurants, as opposed to sit-down restaurants. Former York also distinguishes between restaurants with and without delivery service.
