[pw20]

And for those that lament the disappearing 'context' of Yorkville with it's unaccessible, split level with stairs schlocky architecture I say good riddance.

End of rant.

The square is none of the above. It's neither shlocky, nor inaccessible, nor split level. It is a really fascinating example of adaptive re-use done by an important Toronto architect. I agree that there's a thin line between historical fantacism and "urban progress"... but not sure this is where the line is drawn.

 

[greenleaf]

I'm not sure what this permit means since City Council adopted 33 Avenue Road on the Inventory of Heritage Properties:

City Council Decision

City Council on February 19 and 20, 2014, adopted the following:

1. City Council include the property at 33 Avenue Road (York Square) on the City of Toronto Inventory of Heritage Properties.

2. City Council direct the Acting Director, Urban Design, City Planning, to submit a report on the reasons for designation under Part IV, Section 29 of the Ontario Heritage Act to the Toronto and East York Community Council through the Toronto Preservation Board.

 

[HDLtd]

The square is none of the above. It's neither shlocky, nor inaccessible, nor split level. It is a really fascinating example of adaptive re-use done by an important Toronto architect. I agree that there's a thin line between historical fantacism and "urban progress"... but not sure this is where the line is drawn.

I may be wrong, but I believe the retail isn't at grade, although the entrances from the street are... You walk in and then have to walk up stairs. So it IS both inaccessible (from a code perspective - wheelchair access) and split level. Great retail this building will never have, and therefore the corner will remain a deadzone. That's okay if you think that this architecture deserves to be treated like a museum piece and by not allowing change completely disregard broader goals of eyes on the street/activity, but I don't share that opinion.

 

[Automation Gallery]

Did they do it shotgun to stop this development from going ahead, or did they do it for a façade-omy and extra section 37 funds??

Also, would declaring this a heritage site 2 years after the original development application, effect any decisions if the developer where to go to the OMB?

http://app.toronto.ca/DevelopmentApplications/searchPlanningAppSetup.do?action=init

140 YORKVILLE AVE

OPA / Rezoning 12 113502 STE 27 OZ Ward 27
- Tor & E.York Jan 27, 2012 Application Submitted Jan 27, 2012 Residential Apartments Tamir, Oren
(416) 392-7349
The application proposes to construct a 38 storey (120 metres, plus 6-metre mechanical penthouse, and an addition 5-metre elevator overrun and architectural element - total 131 metres) mixed-use building with 342 residential units and retail in the first two storeys. A total of 247 parking spaces (203 residential and 44 visitors/commercial) in a five level underground parking facility accessed via Avenue Road.

 

[CN Tower]

I may be wrong, but I believe the retail isn't at grade, although the entrances from the street are... You walk in and then have to walk up stairs. So it IS both inaccessible (from a code perspective - wheelchair access) and split level. Great retail this building will never have, and therefore the corner will remain a deadzone. That's okay if you think that this architecture deserves to be treated like a museum piece and by not allowing change completely disregard broader goals of eyes on the street/activity, but I don't share that opinion.

I have no problem with demolishing this property but the building replacing it should not be over 10 storeys along Yorkville.

 

[HDLtd]

The owner of a property decides to sell. A real estate agent tells him that it's worth X amount because there are buildings across the street that are Y storeys tall, and that the OMB won't turn down a "reasonable" similar proposal even if the City does.

So the owner puts the property up for sale at a price that will require the buyer to build big to get any payback. Public pressure may save a heritage facade, but the new owner will find a way to make their investment pay off.

It's not that amazing, that's par for the course, it's our system. The only way to stop it from happening is by putting enforceable regulations in place to limit development, like a Heritage Conservation District. They are tough to put in place, but it can happen. When that happens, that's amazing.

42

That doesn't tell the entire story...

MPAC also looks at comparable land sales in the area and raises taxes to the landowner based on the site being a condo site regardless of what is there currently/historically. This is happening throughout the city where owner of heritage building gets reassessed as a development site, making it unaffordable to operate in it's current form based on astronomical taxes psf of existing building, and therefore has to develop themselves or sell to a developer based on the precedent MPAC has sent. The city sucks and blows on this front - if you want to maintain heritage, create a special tax class that provides an incentive to maintain and re-invest in the current form. Otherwise tax it as a development site and allow development.

 

[HDLtd]

Did they do it shotgun to stop this development from going ahead, or did they do it for a façade-omy and extra section 37 funds??

Also, would declaring this a heritage site 2 years after the original development application, effect any decisions if the developer where to go to the OMB?

They may have done it to improve leverage to negotiate more section 37, it happens. However, you are unable to appeal heritage listing/designation to the OMB. They don't have the jurisdiction.

 

[HDLtd]

I have no problem with demolishing this property but the building replacing it should not be over 10 storeys along Yorkville.

There are already over 8 buildings along Yorkville over 10 stories. Not to mention the transit infrastructure in place here - its the perfect location (yorkville) for density.

 

[modernizt]

Great... more finer-grain spaces lost in Yorkville and replaced by developments that give little in the sense of scale or interaction with the sidewalk. Blech.

 

[greenleaf]

It's not that amazing, that's par for the course, it's our system. The only way to stop it from happening is by putting enforceable regulations in place to limit development, like a Heritage Conservation District. They are tough to put in place, but it can happen. When that happens, that's amazing.
42

This could be the outcome of the new development permit system. Keesmaat described it as like each neighbourhood being like how an HCD functions now.

 

[pw20]

I may be wrong, but I believe the retail isn't at grade, although the entrances from the street are... You walk in and then have to walk up stairs. So it IS both inaccessible (from a code perspective - wheelchair access) and split level. Great retail this building will never have, and therefore the corner will remain a deadzone. That's okay if you think that this architecture deserves to be treated like a museum piece and by not allowing change completely disregard broader goals of eyes on the street/activity, but I don't share that opinion.

You are wrong. The retail is predominately at grade throughout the Yorkville and Avenue Road sides of the building. The few retail outlets on the north side of the property on Avenue Road have a staircase. Most retail accessed via the square, Yorkville or Avenue Road are at Grade. Unlike a lot of refurbished Yorkville victorians which are quite pedestrian unfriendly - the way this was retrofitted has made it quite pedestrian friendly.

 

[CN Tower]

There are already over 8 buildings along Yorkville over 10 stories. Not to mention the transit infrastructure in place here - its the perfect location (yorkville) for density.

No higher than the Hazelton on Yorkville.

No higher than the Prince Arthur on Avenue Road. A step down from the old Four Seasons would make sense.

Zoning laws exist for a reason. Don't further erode the fabric of the street.

You think a schlocky condo filled with rich foreign student renters will save the decaying mall? Not on your life.

 

[interchange42]

Zoning laws exist for a reason.

On that point only–

Toronto's zoning by-laws are considered obsolete by those involved at every stage of the development system, both on the industry side and the government side, since they still represent pre-Places To Grow Act policy. Until such time as they are amended in general, amendments specific to each site are expected as a matter of corse. Current zoning limits are now used as part of the negotiation process in terms of the degree to which the application surpasses the zoning, not the fact that it does. 99% of everything built today surpasses the limits set out in the zoning by-laws, often by many times what is currently allowed pre-amendment.

42

 

[GenerationW]

Until such time as they are amended in general....

Is that happening any time soon?

 

[innsertnamehere]

probably not, its not politically viable as the NIMBYS hate it. planners generally like to continue to scream LALALALALA with their fingers in the ears and talking about "avenues", which while all nice and good generally goes in direct violation of market demands.