Once city planners and urban design staff tell you enough times over to do something a certain way (i.e. how to articulate your ground level a certain way... "No! Those setback portions will become a place for homeless people!") you eventually revert to a formula so that you don't go through repeat headaches every time you do a project.
 
innsertnamehere said:
Lamb and aA hav ethos tendency to build insanely tall ceiling retail spaces at grade with huge glass facades that are bland as hell. Everything from the second floor up is great but god is the ground level sterile.

also I feel like the landscaping here is lacklustre. Given the side street condition I would have loved to see trees in raised planters along the street much like you see along Maple Leaf Gardens on York St. There is the space here, you don’t need a super wide sidewalk.
Click to expand...
Yes, the trees they planted are remarkably puny! They really might have sprung for better (more mature) ones - though proper planters as you suggest would be great!
 
Feb 27, 2021


20210227_143814.jpg
20210227_143842.jpg
20210227_143906.jpg
20210227_143922.jpg
20210227_144015.jpg
20210227_144036.jpg
 
Lamb does have multiple other projects on the horizon within several blocks radius of this area; Bauhaus, 75 Ontario, The Queen, and the Forli Motors site. He remains bullish on turning it into Lambville East.
 
AlbertC said:
Lamb does have multiple other projects on the horizon within several blocks radius of this area; Bauhaus, 75 Ontario, The Queen, and the Forli Motors site. He remains bullish on turning it into Lambville East.
Click to expand...
Now, THAT'S a scary prospect!
 
Previously brought into focus by the condo luminary Peter Freed for King West last decade with Freedville popping up. Although, Lamb had quite an influence on the development patterns of the area too. Greenwin were probably the OG's at it back in the day throughout the city. ;)
 
I am quite puzzled by this CofA application for extra height and various other (small) things - did someone screw up or??? . It is on agenda for 25 August./ See:

1629747834925.png
 
Looks like it from the cover letter:

At the time of the OMB hearing, and throughout the site plan approval process, the architectural plans for this building have included a two storey mechanical penthouse commencing on a portion of level 25 and extending to an upper mechanical penthouse level above. This two storey mechanical penthouse was excluded from the calculation of gross floor area when the By-laws were finalized (in consultation with City Staff) and approved by the OMB. More recently however, Buildings Department staff have taken the interpretation that in By-law 569-2013 only the upper mechanical penthouse area may be excluded from the calculation of gross floor area, and the lower mechanical penthouse area on the 25th floor must be included. Buildings Staff have not applied this interpretation to the calculation of gross floor area in By-law 438-86. There are also a few additional small areas within the building which were previously excluded, but are now being included in the calculation. Accordingly variances to increase the permitted residential gross floor area, and the combined residential and non-residential gross floor area, are required in respect of the By-law 569-2013 site specific By-law. The building continues to comply with the permitted gross floor area in the By-law 438-86 site specific By-law and these variances do not change the height or massing of the building.
Click to expand...

The site specific Zoning By-laws currently permit 4 substandard parking spaces. As a result of final measured drawings of the as built conditions in the garage, minor deficiencies in the dimensions of 13 additional parking spaces (out of a total of 128 parking spaces) have been identified. Lea Consulting Ltd. has assessed these additional substandard parking spaces and, as indicated in the attached report, has concluded that the spaces remain fully functional and pose no operational concerns for passenger access and egress.
Click to expand...

These variances relate to the setbacks at the 25th and 26th levels of the building. The by-law requires these levels to be setback 11.34 m from the north lot line and 11.162 m from the south lot line. In this case, it has been determined that the as built setback at these levels is 11.16 m from the north lot line (0.18 m difference) and 11.162 m from the south lot line (0.168 m difference). The difference (of approximately 7 inches) is imperceptible from the surrounding streets below.
Click to expand...

These variances relate to the height of a hot tub that a purchaser of a unit on the 25th floor wishes to have installed on its north facing terrace. The hot tub projects above the permitted 24th storey roof height by less than 1.0 m, less than other permitted roof top projections, and the location of the hot tub will be imperceptible from the surrounding streets below.
Click to expand...

Wonder who convinced the developer to throw that hot tub provision on there.

These are all pretty typical - substandard parking spaces are very common and that's a sign of a poorly written by-law as you typically allow a good portion to be substandard as this inevitably occurs. Not sure what happened with the setback changes. And of course some building department stupidity with deciding to change their interpretation of the by-law half-way through the project forcing a minor variance.

This is likely holding up registration as the developer can't close the building permit until it clears zoning.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
innsertnamehere said:
Looks like it from the cover letter:









Wonder who convinced the developer to throw that hot tub provision on there.

These are all pretty typical - substandard parking spaces are very common and that's a sign of a poorly written by-law as you typically allow a good portion to be substandard as this inevitably occurs. Not sure what happened with the setback changes. And of course some building department stupidity with deciding to change their interpretation of the by-law half-way through the project forcing a minor variance.

This is likely holding up registration as the developer can't close the building permit until it clears zoning.
Click to expand...
Where do you guys find this information?

thank you
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: DSC
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top