Event: 506 Church Street Online Information Session
Date: July 16, 2020
Time: 6:30 pm-7:30 pm
Location: Webex Events

Description: Graywood is hosting an online information session for the community to learn more about what they are proposing at 506-516 Church Street. This session will feature a brief presentation from the project team, as well as answering questions we receive through the project website prior to the session.

Notice Board – 506 Church Street

We invite you to learn more about our proposal for a new mixed-use development at 506-516 Church Street.
506churchstreet.com 506churchstreet.com
 
506 CHURCH ST
Ward 13 - Tor & E.York District

Development Applications

Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment applications to facilitate the development of the site for a 15-storey mixed-use building comprised of 1,072 square metres of non-residential floor area and 12,708 square metres of residential floor area. A total of 173 dwelling units are proposed.
Click to expand...
 
So they are keeping the house/bar but incorporating it into the design wile that’s great they are keeping it or trying to. Could it not then reopen as the bar it was or become some sorta entrance for the condo?
 

506 Church Street

We invite you to learn more about our proposal for a new mixed-use development at 506-516 Church Street.
506churchstreet.com 506churchstreet.com


1595883018242.png

1595883047129.png
 
I cannot believe that's not a joke.

That's possibly the worst opening salvo I've seen.

42
 
The more I look at it (I must be feeling masochistic) the more I am convinced that this is only a massing study plus an indication of a which sections will would receive one of two treatments; one that's more deferential to the Victorians, and one that's more modern.

I'm convinced of that now because 1) it's so early in the process and 2) there's no real design there. It literally is a cut-and-paste job at this point. I'm willing to bet that, if pressed, Diamond Schmitt would tell you just that, and that we shouldn't expect a design until a later stage. Not that I think this is a wise move: there's been as little time put into this at this point, and it shows. Graywood may only have budgeted so much for this first part of the process, and it may be an unwisely low amount.

42
 
interchange42 said:
The more I look at it (I must be feeling masochistic) the more I am convinced that this is only a massing study plus an indication of a which sections will would receive one of two treatments; one that's more deferential to the Victorians, and one that's more modern.

I'm convinced of that now because 1) it's so early in the process and 2) there's no real design there. It literally is a cut-and-paste job at this point. I'm willing to bet that, if pressed, Diamond Schmitt would tell you just that, and that we shouldn't expect a design until a later stage. Not that I think this is a wise move: there's been as little time put into this at this point, and it shows. Graywood may only have budgeted so much for this first part of the process, and it may be an unwisely low amount.

42
Click to expand...

Architecture is supposedly Item 1 in the Q&A during the meeting - I am curious about how THAT went. I mean, 50s institutional is hot again but still....Ziggurating that isn't my idea of nice.

AoD
 
interchange42 said:
The more I look at it (I must be feeling masochistic) the more I am convinced that this is only a massing study plus an indication of a which sections will would receive one of two treatments; one that's more deferential to the Victorians, and one that's more modern.

I'm convinced of that now because 1) it's so early in the process and 2) there's no real design there. It literally is a cut-and-paste job at this point. I'm willing to bet that, if pressed, Diamond Schmitt would tell you just that, and that we shouldn't expect a design until a later stage. Not that I think this is a wise move: there's been as little time put into this at this point, and it shows. Graywood may only have budgeted so much for this first part of the process, and it may be an unwisely low amount.

42
Click to expand...
I agree!
There's no way that some global hedge fund or private equity fund would ever be allowed to build an ugly, cheaply constructed, cash grab in Toronto!
That would never be allowed to happen.
Unless.. they promised to retain a 'heritage element' and include a useless pocket parkette, ugly art thingy and pay lifeblood fees.
Not that the fees have much to do with anything.
Other than under those strict circumstances - IT COULD NEVER HAPPEN!
We have standards, after all.
 
CityStay said:
I agree!
There's no way that some global hedge fund or private equity fund would ever be allowed to build an ugly, cheaply constructed, cash grab in Toronto!
That would never be allowed to happen.
Unless.. they promised to retain a 'heritage element' and include a useless pocket parkette, ugly art thingy and pay lifeblood fees.
Not that the fees have much to do with anything.
Other than under those strict circumstances - IT COULD NEVER HAPPEN!
We have standards, after all.
Click to expand...
Thanks for schooling my dumb ass! I'm new to the scene, with no idea of how it works, so I really appreciate your taking the time to calmly and cooly explain that everything is simply a shitshow.

42
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top