i Missed where it said place holder though I assumesd so based on its lack of design. Either way it’s placed in the wrong area. No big tower should go there or at that height. nor such a boring shape. But let’s see what they manage to come up with. Hopefully it does Not plaster it’s self with balconies.
 
We can dream!

condo - ritz carlton (old).jpg
 
ptbotrmpfn said:
i Missed where it said place holder though I assumesd so based on its lack of design. Either way it’s placed in the wrong area. No big tower should go there or at that height. nor such a boring shape. But let’s see what they manage to come up with. Hopefully it does Not plaster it’s self with balconies.
Click to expand...
A condo tower near the lake not have balconies? Of course it will have balconies, as it should.

I'm not under the impression that what we have seen so far is a placeholder. Not impossible, but I'm not sure why you think so @WeirdFishes.

42
 
I know this isnt the final design, but I don't see Cityzen changing their design scheme much for this phase. I wasn't aware of a park being considered for the foot of Yonge, but in a theoretical sense, devoid of the realities of this housing market and reality, more park space, especially by the foot of Yonge is a great idea for the thousands who are moving to this already dense area.
 
From the Planning Rational Report:

1621283185974.png


Not quite as much residential parking as I feared, with 97 commercial spaces, the parking ratio is 0.39 spaces per unit.
 
Seems a bit 'greedy' to have a multi-building plan approved (and sold) and then suddenly replace a 13 floor building with a 45 floor one. If I had bought in phases 1 or 2 I would be quite pissed off!

qqe3.jpg
 
Preliminary Report on this one is headed to the Sept 9th meeting of TEYCC.

Report here: https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2021/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-170070.pdf

In looking over the report, this one is going to encounter some serious headwinds and Separation Distances appear to the largest culprit. Though there are some possible issues around shadowing parks and a few other areas.

From said report:

1630073575341.png
 
Northern Light said:
Preliminary Report on this one is headed to the Sept 9th meeting of TEYCC.

Report here: https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2021/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-170070.pdf

In looking over the report, this one is going to encounter some serious headwinds and Separation Distances appear to the largest culprit. Though there are some possible issues around shadowing parks and a few other areas.

From said report:

View attachment 344384
Click to expand...
What does the process look like going froward from the TEYCC? What are the next steps?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top