G
gbelan
Guest
Re: Upswing
great^i wonder how much longer till tate and lyle and lcbo are gone.
great^i wonder how much longer till tate and lyle and lcbo are gone.
R
rdaner
Guest
Waiting Patiently
Redpath must be salivating as the value of their land will be skyrocketing with all of the surrounding properties being built on.
Redpath must be salivating as the value of their land will be skyrocketing with all of the surrounding properties being built on.
B
Brighter Hell
Guest
Re: Waiting Patiently
Nice to see waterfront development finally going east of Yonge.
Nice to see waterfront development finally going east of Yonge.
A
avenue4
Guest
approved?
Is this thing approved? It seems odd that the TWRC would allow another condo as one of the first developments on the waterfront. I mean do we really need ANOTHER condo blocking the waterfront. Particularly at this prime location. I thought this space was supposed to be used for new ferry docks per the plan that won last year.
Is this thing approved? It seems odd that the TWRC would allow another condo as one of the first developments on the waterfront. I mean do we really need ANOTHER condo blocking the waterfront. Particularly at this prime location. I thought this space was supposed to be used for new ferry docks per the plan that won last year.
U
unimaginative2
Guest
Re: approved?
All this stuff about preservation of Redpath is quite silly, I think. I can guarantee that they'll stay there for a couple more years, until the property's surrounded by condos. Then they'll shut down, and sell out, taking a healthy profit generated entirely by the City's actions. The City should have bought the property while it was cheap, and kept the profit for themselves.
All this stuff about preservation of Redpath is quite silly, I think. I can guarantee that they'll stay there for a couple more years, until the property's surrounded by condos. Then they'll shut down, and sell out, taking a healthy profit generated entirely by the City's actions. The City should have bought the property while it was cheap, and kept the profit for themselves.
B
brettrobinson
Guest
re: approved?
This is from the East Bayfront Precinct Plan (off of www.towaterfront.ca
Special Use Site
The special use site at the foot of Jarvis Slip could be conceived of either a free standing, public winter garden, or as a galleria incorporated into a larger commercial complex. TWRC is targeting this location for a substantial employment use, and has planned the
site to accommodate a wide range of building types. Depending upon the requirements of a future tenant, a building floor plate of 50,000 sq.ft. to 150,000 sq.ft. can be accommodated at this location.
This proposal seems to conform to the 'substantial' employment use outlined in the plan.
For the people that actually saw the presentation, did it include any public area?
This is from the East Bayfront Precinct Plan (off of www.towaterfront.ca
Special Use Site
The special use site at the foot of Jarvis Slip could be conceived of either a free standing, public winter garden, or as a galleria incorporated into a larger commercial complex. TWRC is targeting this location for a substantial employment use, and has planned the
site to accommodate a wide range of building types. Depending upon the requirements of a future tenant, a building floor plate of 50,000 sq.ft. to 150,000 sq.ft. can be accommodated at this location.
This proposal seems to conform to the 'substantial' employment use outlined in the plan.
For the people that actually saw the presentation, did it include any public area?
B
brettrobinson
Guest
re: approved?
Sorry all, I meant to post that under the other forum regarding the new office building at the foot of Yonge.
Sorry all, I meant to post that under the other forum regarding the new office building at the foot of Yonge.
M
mark simpson
Guest
Re: re: approved?
private property not part of the TWRC plan
private property not part of the TWRC plan
salvius
Active Member
Cool project' or another affront on waterfront?
Cool project' or another affront on waterfront?
Angry councillors say their hands tied as 5 buildings slated for foot of Yonge St.
Paul Moloney
Jim Byers
City hall bureau
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/213182
One of the last prime pieces of waterfront real estate in Toronto is about to get the condominium treatment.
The former Marine Terminal 27 site at the foot of Yonge St. is poised to see construction begin on a project the developers hope will eventually total five buildings with 1,500 to 2,000 units.
City councillors are angry about the idea but say it appears there's little they can do to protect one of the last undeveloped parcels on what's supposed to be a jewel-like waterfront. The land is currently a parking lot.
"It's definitely a problem because it continues with the highrises near the water's edge," said Deputy Mayor Joe Pantalone. "But I don't think there's much we can do. We might be able to change a little but we can't affect the density."
Councillor Brian Ashton, chair of council's planning and growth management committee, agreed the city's options are limited. "I don't think city council would find that appropriate, but I don't know what can be done. The last thing people want is a huge curtain of condos near the lake."
But John Campbell, president of the Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corp., said that won't be the case. "It's not a wall of condos. It's not reminiscent of some of the prevailing waterfront projects that people point to as bad examples."
"Obviously, I'm biased, but I think it's a really cool project," said architect Peter Clewes of Architects Alliance. "If it sells well – which I think it will because it's an extraordinary property – they would start construction very quickly."
A sales centre is to go up soon, with marketing to start early this summer and construction of the first phase over the next 2 1/2 years, Clewes said.
The first phase, totalling 477 units, consists of:
# Two 12-storey buildings connected by a two-storey bridge on top, on the Yonge St. side of the property, beside Captain John's restaurant.
# A 14-storey building running alongside the Redpath sugar refinery on the east side of the site, basically from the water to Queens Quay. The building would have condos overlooking downtown.
"We actually want to do a lower building, but it depends on working with Redpath and the Ministry of Environment," Clewes said. "There are sound issues that come from Ministry of Environment regulations."
Freeland St., which runs parallel to Yonge ending at Queens Quay, would be extended south into the development, ending in a cul de sac, providing public access from the street to the water's edge, Clewes said.
"What we're going to do from a landscaping perspective is make Freeland more like an urban square," he said.
A landscaped public promenade 25 metres wide would run along the water.
The site was originally owned by what was then the Toronto Harbour Commission. In a controversial move, it was sold in the 1980s to a company called Avro Quay Ltd., which succeeded in getting it rezoned in 1996 for about 1,400 condos.
The development subsequently went to the Ontario Municipal Board, which in 2002 limited heights to 14 storeys while permitting 1,500 to 2,000 units.
Clewes said the actual number will depend on unit size – the bigger the units, the smaller the total number.
Because rezoning permissions have already been granted, the current developers, Cityzen and Fernbrook Homes, need only site plan approval. Those issues are to go to a committee of adjustment hearing on July 4.
"We're substantially in accordance with what was approved there," Clewes said. "These are minor variations we're asking for at committee of adjustment."
Campbell said the site has been privately owned for some time. The waterfront corporation wanted to buy all of it but didn't have enough money. The corporation did buy half a hectare from Torstar, just east of Captain John's, a few years ago for $12.5 million. The site remains a small, fenced-in parking lot.
"We're talking with the developers about how we maybe combine our land with theirs and have more public space," Campbell said. "In the meantime, they're going ahead with the first phase."
Plans aren't clear for the corporation's half-hectare parcel.
"Our intention is to provide something that's a grand space," Campbell said. "We want a destination at the terminus of Yonge St. Not a building, we want a public place; a park or a plaza. But if we work with the developer it might be on a larger scale."
With files from Gail Swainson
Cool project' or another affront on waterfront?
Angry councillors say their hands tied as 5 buildings slated for foot of Yonge St.
Paul Moloney
Jim Byers
City hall bureau
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/213182
One of the last prime pieces of waterfront real estate in Toronto is about to get the condominium treatment.
The former Marine Terminal 27 site at the foot of Yonge St. is poised to see construction begin on a project the developers hope will eventually total five buildings with 1,500 to 2,000 units.
City councillors are angry about the idea but say it appears there's little they can do to protect one of the last undeveloped parcels on what's supposed to be a jewel-like waterfront. The land is currently a parking lot.
"It's definitely a problem because it continues with the highrises near the water's edge," said Deputy Mayor Joe Pantalone. "But I don't think there's much we can do. We might be able to change a little but we can't affect the density."
Councillor Brian Ashton, chair of council's planning and growth management committee, agreed the city's options are limited. "I don't think city council would find that appropriate, but I don't know what can be done. The last thing people want is a huge curtain of condos near the lake."
But John Campbell, president of the Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corp., said that won't be the case. "It's not a wall of condos. It's not reminiscent of some of the prevailing waterfront projects that people point to as bad examples."
"Obviously, I'm biased, but I think it's a really cool project," said architect Peter Clewes of Architects Alliance. "If it sells well – which I think it will because it's an extraordinary property – they would start construction very quickly."
A sales centre is to go up soon, with marketing to start early this summer and construction of the first phase over the next 2 1/2 years, Clewes said.
The first phase, totalling 477 units, consists of:
# Two 12-storey buildings connected by a two-storey bridge on top, on the Yonge St. side of the property, beside Captain John's restaurant.
# A 14-storey building running alongside the Redpath sugar refinery on the east side of the site, basically from the water to Queens Quay. The building would have condos overlooking downtown.
"We actually want to do a lower building, but it depends on working with Redpath and the Ministry of Environment," Clewes said. "There are sound issues that come from Ministry of Environment regulations."
Freeland St., which runs parallel to Yonge ending at Queens Quay, would be extended south into the development, ending in a cul de sac, providing public access from the street to the water's edge, Clewes said.
"What we're going to do from a landscaping perspective is make Freeland more like an urban square," he said.
A landscaped public promenade 25 metres wide would run along the water.
The site was originally owned by what was then the Toronto Harbour Commission. In a controversial move, it was sold in the 1980s to a company called Avro Quay Ltd., which succeeded in getting it rezoned in 1996 for about 1,400 condos.
The development subsequently went to the Ontario Municipal Board, which in 2002 limited heights to 14 storeys while permitting 1,500 to 2,000 units.
Clewes said the actual number will depend on unit size – the bigger the units, the smaller the total number.
Because rezoning permissions have already been granted, the current developers, Cityzen and Fernbrook Homes, need only site plan approval. Those issues are to go to a committee of adjustment hearing on July 4.
"We're substantially in accordance with what was approved there," Clewes said. "These are minor variations we're asking for at committee of adjustment."
Campbell said the site has been privately owned for some time. The waterfront corporation wanted to buy all of it but didn't have enough money. The corporation did buy half a hectare from Torstar, just east of Captain John's, a few years ago for $12.5 million. The site remains a small, fenced-in parking lot.
"We're talking with the developers about how we maybe combine our land with theirs and have more public space," Campbell said. "In the meantime, they're going ahead with the first phase."
Plans aren't clear for the corporation's half-hectare parcel.
"Our intention is to provide something that's a grand space," Campbell said. "We want a destination at the terminus of Yonge St. Not a building, we want a public place; a park or a plaza. But if we work with the developer it might be on a larger scale."
With files from Gail Swainson
Sir Novelty Fashion
Senior Member
Hmm. Renderings, anyone?
Wow did this one ever fly under the radar. Sales centre already going up and no info from our end until this.
brettrobinson
New Member
it didn't. there was a thread about this 'Pier 27'.
Mongo
Senior Member
So the final two buildings, which would be no more than 14 floors in height, would contain between 1,023 to 1,523 units between them? These two buildings would have a much larger footprint than the first three buildings. Goodbye, open space. How exactly is this different from what already exists along the harbour front?
Bill
maestro
Senior Member
the height of the building and the multi-storey above ground parkades for one thing
i'll wait for the siteplan but find our wind chilled for most of the year waterfront has enough open spaces compared to enough people
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
The devil is in the details, but it doesn't sound too bad as per the Star article.
Bill:
I am not sure if one necessarily want more "open space" - a well designed urban block would probably do more to revive that rather moribund stretch than yet another park.
AoD
Bill:
I am not sure if one necessarily want more "open space" - a well designed urban block would probably do more to revive that rather moribund stretch than yet another park.
AoD