SunriseChampion said:
Why is this?
Click to expand...

Metrolinx purchased the property just south of 9 Dawes, next to their platform for a Passenger Pickup and Drop Off.

Extending the platform just to the edge of that site is roughly 40M to the east.

Currently the platform extends just under/barely west of the Main Street bridge, is not a big move to gently nibble at the western side and/or create a slightly oversized platform to afford that additional convenience.

Whether the foot of Dawes Rd. can handle the resulting traffic is a completely different discussion.
 
Yeah, ok, 40 metres can be accommodated without removing the portion under Main with the secret back exit to get to the south.

Didn't realise it was that close. Thought they'd be moving it away from Main significantly. I forget how long these platforms are sometimes, even though I'm on them often. Day dreaming in la la land, I suppose.
 
SunriseChampion said:
Yeah, ok, 40 metres can be accommodated without removing the portion under Main with the secret back exit to get to the south.

Didn't realise it was that close. Thought they'd be moving it away from Main significantly. I forget how long these platforms are sometimes, even though I'm on them often. Day dreaming in la la land, I suppose.
Click to expand...
platforms moving 170m - buildings may not move that far of course.

Main Street Planning Study: City/SvN

Final Report on new zoning/plan for the Main/Danforth area going to Council. Principally focused on Danforth from just west of Main to Dawes. https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2019/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-140296.pdf http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2019/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-140297.pdf...
urbantoronto.ca urbantoronto.ca
 
Below is the image from the Main St. Planning study.

It does not show a 170M shift which would be to the foot of Trent.

It clearly shows the platforms ending at Dawes.

Also the station building will be closer to Main than it is now.

Interesting to add, looking at the old TPAP/EA, this configuration does not show 2 island platforms, but rather 2 sides and 1 island, with 4 tracks total.

1576085254651.png
 
Request for Direction Report is up:


City is opposed to the development in is current form because:

This report recommends that the City Solicitor together with Planning Staff and other appropriate Staff be directed to oppose the appeal at the LPAT. The proposal requires further revisions to the site organization, the massing and scale of the towers, and to the public realm before the application can be considered to represent good planning. In its current form, the proposal is inconsistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (2014), does not conform to A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2019), and does not conform to the Official Plan. The proposal also does not conform to the Council-adopted Official Plan Amendment 478.

****

The current proposal provides a minimum 6-metre wide sidewalk, the dimension of which meets Section 4.2 of the Tall Building Design Guidelines and OPA 478. However, the base of the building cantilevers over this 6-metre sidewalk on the floors above the ground floor. There should be a minimum of 6-metres of sidewalk width that is clear from any cantilever in order to allow for street trees to grow. Weather protection is encouraged and can be achieved through the use of awnings and canopies. Allowing for a clear 6-metres of sidewalk width will ensure the sidewalk is designed to provide safe, attractive, interesting and comfortable spaces for pedestrians (Section 3.1.1, Policy 6).

Currently, the proposal does not include an open space. Section 3.1.2 Policy 1(d) of the Official Plan states that new development will provide amenity for adjacent streets and open spaces to make these areas attractive, interesting, comfortable and functional for pedestrians by including landscaped open space within the development site. Official Plan policies regarding tall buildings specifically state that tall building proposals will address key urban design considerations including providing high quality, comfortable and usable publicly accessible open space areas (Section 3.1.3, Policy 2(e)). Map 4 of OPA 478 indicates that the subject site should also provide a POPS and midblock connection. To meet these policies in the Official Plan, a POPS (privately-owned publicly accessible space) should be provided within the development site. This POPS could be located near or in front of a community space, such as the space for the Legion, and could serve as a forecourt.

Another way in which to enhance the public realm of this development site and the surrounding urban context is to provide a mid-block connection. Section 2.2.3 Policy 2(a)(ii) of the Official Plan speaks to transportation improvements such as improved connections to rapid transit stations. There may be an opportunity to provide a mid-block connection that connects the buildings to the east of the subject site towards Dawes Road, thus allowing improved access to Danforth GO station for residents living along Trent Avenue and the low-rise neighbourhoods further east of Trent Avenue. This mid-block connection could be designed to include soft landscaping and street furniture.

The proposal should be revised in the manner discussed in this section to meet the intent of OPA 478. Sun, Shadow, Wind The Official Plan requires development to limit shadowing.
 
The status for 9 -25 Dawes ave project was changed to indicate that the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal ("LPAT") received an appeal. Could anyone please help to find this appeal?

Any place to buy in Toronto is not cheap. Then one day, we all risk to find out that a developer will build a much taller building just 4-5 meters from your windows and we will never see the light of sun again (enjoy the shadow, right?). How could the real estate investments be safe with these re-zoning mess...
 

Attachments

  • Danforth Plan_backgroundfile-140296.pdf
    3.6 MB · Views: 439
Last edited:
Maiya said:
The status for 9 -25 Dawes ave project was changed to indicate that the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal ("LPAT") received an appeal. Could anyone please help to find this appeal?

The appeal was submitted shortly before the City council issued their final report supporting high rises at Dawes (9-25 and 10-30). Refer to the attachment ("Main Street Planning Study") - page 71 for Tall buildings and description for the "Character Area C" (page 70 of the attached report).
Based on this report, is it correct that the city has conceptually allowed building 2 towers on a massive podium up to 24 meter high?

It looks like a crime with respect to the owners of the existing Trent condos facing North and West. They will get a big shadow from the West, no privacy, and a wind corridor to blow on their balconies. So sad our city could not put a park at 9 & 25 Dawes.

Any place to buy in Toronto is not cheap. Then one day, we all risk to find out that a developer will build a much taller building just 4-5 meters from your windows and we will never see the light of sun again (enjoy the shadow, right?). How could the real estate investments be safe with these re-zoning mess...
Click to expand...

While there are real issues to consider w/this redevelopment proposal; it is not reasonable to buy in a tower in Toronto and not imagine you will have towers impede your view in the future.

Remember, there were homeowners on that street before Trent Condo was built, who feel the exact same way about that condo.
 
Site Plan Approval application submitted:

Development Applications

Updated project description:
Site Plan Approval for two mixed-use towers having heights of 26 and 27-storeys, atop a 5-storey podium. The proposed non-residential gross floor area is 1501.2 square metres, and the proposed residential gross floor area is 44,542.8 square metres. 646 residential dwelling units are proposed.
Click to expand...
 
Damn those are nice!
With all the developments proposed in this area Main/Danforth will really become a transit hub.
Cannot wait to see the plans for Canadian Tire and Sobeys
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top