UrbanFervour said:
Yes but isn't the plan to have TOWNHOUSES fronting on to Bay? I seriously hope that idea has been rethought.
Click to expand...

Agreed, the towns should have been fronted onto St. Mary Street. Bay Street is so noisy, big money for townhomes with so much noise = unhappy purchasers.
 
dt_toronto_geek said:
Agreed, the towns should have been fronted onto St. Mary Street. Bay Street is so noisy, big money for townhomes with so much noise = unhappy purchasers.
Click to expand...

Apart form purchaser satisfaction, it just makes little sense from the standpoint of good urbanism... Bay Street is being pressed from North and South by growing density. It only makes sense for the addresses fronting on Bay to be commercial/retail. Townhouses, imo, do not belong on major arteries, ESPECIALLY right in the central core of the city, 2 blocks from Bay Station. It just makes no sense to me.
 
I was under the impression that bike lanes were coming to Bay St. in the near future. If true, that will slow an already busy street to a crawl.
 
neuhaus said:
unless they were designed to be work/live townhouses.
Click to expand...

Heya- i'm not a planner & I am curious about a work/live townhouses. Is that like a hair salon where the hairdresser lives upstairs (or a law office where the lawyer lives upstairs etc..)?
 
ShonTron said:
Workers were cutting down all the trees on the U Condo site today. First sign of progress.
Click to expand...

Progress? Yet another condo on Bay Street. This is far from Progress. Walk down Bay Street from Bloor to Dundas sometime and ask yourself, if you just wasted 15 minutes of your life or not looking at prime examples of nothing but the greed and inconsideration of developers.
 
fred said:
Progress? Yet another condo on Bay Street. This is far from Progress. Walk down Bay Street from Bloor to Dundas sometime and ask yourself, if you just wasted 15 minutes of your life or not looking at prime examples of nothing but the greed and inconsideration of developers.
Click to expand...

What do you mean exactly? It's a downtown street and development has filled the parcels of land because there's a demand for people living and moving into the core. Maybe you were thinking that mixed developement was more appropiate or something else? But Bay is a high density street and the condos being built fit this plan.
 
I fail to see the logic behind those that bitch about condos and the developers that build them. What exactly would they rather have? Office towers? There isn't enough demand to line Bay Street with them even if we were to shut down the 905. The core could always use some more greenspace but hardly at the scale of Bay Street. Also, developers are doing more than their part in that department as well.
 
androiduk

I was under the impression that bike lanes were coming to Bay St. in the near future. If true, that will slow an already busy street to a crawl.
Click to expand...


Bike lanes will not be on this section of Bay; and will not eliminate any lanes of traffic.

They are coming in the section from Dundas to Gerrard, which is wide enough to just stripe a part of the curb lane.

Sharrows will be coming to rest.

Except for Front to Queen's Quay which will get the Yonge St. makeover, (it may lose some lanes, I believe).
 
scaled.php


Parking lot has been fenced off and emptied of cars. Finally, looks like construction is imminent!
 
Does anyone know if the plan is still to build on the shorter tower first and the taller later?
 
Quote from Mike in TO in the first page of this thread, back in December '06.

Mike in TO said:
By the time they go through the approvals process and marketing it may well be 5 years from when they said that a year ago until they break ground.
Click to expand...

Never question The Mike!
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top