Marcanadian

Marcanadian

Moderator
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 30, 2007
Messages
4,015
Reaction score
11,429
26 BURNHAMTHORPE RD
Ward 03 - Etob. York District

Redevelop the subject lands with 123 units of 3 and half storey stacked back-to-back townhouses.

23123qads.JPG


 
Admittedly they are proposing to increase the density here, but it seems counterproductive to take down a couple of 5-storey rental buildings to put in 3 ½ storey townhomes. Surely the property should have more than one building typology on it as they'll have to replace the existing rental suites, and I don't see how townhomes will be given over at current rates for 20 years: that makes no sense. Maybe it will when we see more info… but until then, this makes no sense.

42
 
interchange42 said:
Admittedly they are proposing to increase the density here, but it seems counterproductive to take down a couple of 5-storey rental buildings to put in 3 ½ storey townhomes. Surely the property should have more than one building typology on it as they'll have to replace the existing rental suites, and I don't see how townhomes will be given over at current rates for 20 years: that makes no sense. Maybe it will when we see more info… but until then, this makes no sense.

42
Click to expand...
It isn't the rentals, it's a bunch of detached homes along Burhhamthorper Road and Burhhamthorpe Crescent.
 
innsertnamehere said:
It isn't the rentals, it's a bunch of detached homes along Burhhamthorper Road and Burhhamthorpe Crescent.
Click to expand...
They are proposing to replace 9 detached houses (mostly bungalows) on deep lots with 123, 3.5 storey stacked, back to back townhomes. A great density improvement that will increase the number of homes by 14x over what's there now.
 
Ah, thanks!

42
 
Glad to see something happening here, people have been kicking the tires on this site for years.
 
This one didn't seem to have a thread.

Low rise, but major street, 123 Units to replace 9 SFH; and a refusal report, made me think it was worth one.

Refusal Report to next EYCC - September 9th, 2020.


What would be replaced: (Burnhamthorpe Road frontage)

1598542442459.png


Overhead view of the site: All homes facing Burnhamthorpe, first 4 fronting Burnhamthorpe Crescent:

1598542625154.png
 
Proposal:

1598542741998.png




1598542781523.png
 

Attachments

  • 1598542687511.png
    1598542687511.png
    321.8 KB · Views: 165
This development does have its share of issues.

Notably, it doesn't comply with outdoor amenity space requirements, doesn't dedicate any parkland in green-space challenged area; over supplies parking, and is both dull and lacking in ambition.

I understand forestry's objections to the sheer number of quality trees that would have to go, for this proposal as laid out now.

But at least 1/2 could be saved with a better, denser proposal.

Here is my big issue, the City formally objects based on neighbourhoods, density and privacy/overlook.

Ahem.

Backing on these existing single-family homes is :

1598543205924.png


Which is taller and denser than what is proposed.

Burnhamthorpe is major road with frequent transit.

As seen in this photo, there is commercial to the south of the site, beyond the apartment above; and a large church, parking and commercial to the east and south-east.

1598543355621.png


While I certainly support something better than what is proposed, the density/height objections are nonsense.

Building a mid-rise/hirise at the corner with the crescent, that steps down to its SFH neighbour would be sensible.

A new park could be created in the south-east section of the site and preserve some of the better trees.

It would likely exceed the minimum park dedication by a factor of 4; but that could off-set other section 37 and even see a modest transfer from the City.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top