isaidso
Senior Member
Well the City's Official Plan is far too restrictive. I have no issue with this density and height on this lot size.
- Thread starter AlbertC
- Start date
ADRM
Senior Member
From the last GYRA newsletter
GYRA hates this thing (as most things over 2 storeys).
maestro
Senior Member
The proposed density is unreasonable and sets an ugly precedence no matter what NIMBYs have to say. Arrange something with the midrise condo next door or some heritage property to transfer density. I don't know. You may have to rezone those properties but, it still should be quicker than trying to pass this through. Oh right, it costs a lot money and has been an entirely unnecessary expenditure with our non restrictive process. You should see what other cities force developers to do to build a quarter to half the density being proposed here (For the sake of confusion, dense does not parallel with height)
Urban-Affair
Senior Member
I have to agree, in my mind this proposal seems too built out to the site lines. I think rather then the height, it's the mass the bothers me. I do really like the architecture, just not on this tiny parcel. Maybe as it goes higher it could be more sculpted? Instead of worrying about sculpting the skyline heights, keep the height and pull back the floors as it goes up? I guess that would also be difficult though with the small floor plates.
ADRM
Senior Member
I have to disagree (recognizing these are all subjective judgments); personally, I much prefer tiny floorplates if the tower itself is aesthetically pleasing (which I believe to be the case here).
One of my major gripes with Planning is their slavishness to podium-and-point, which I often find to be much more overwhelming than very tall and narrow towers. I don't think that there's typically much of a difference from a passersby perspective between a 34- and a 54-storey building, and certainly not as much as the difference between a building with a very wide/bulky base than that with a much narrower base.
Further, in this case, I feel that the cut-out/cantilever starting above the third storey would be very effective in reducing the sense of bulk at grade, and that, for me, further mitigates any issues with the density being sought.
One of my major gripes with Planning is their slavishness to podium-and-point, which I often find to be much more overwhelming than very tall and narrow towers. I don't think that there's typically much of a difference from a passersby perspective between a 34- and a 54-storey building, and certainly not as much as the difference between a building with a very wide/bulky base than that with a much narrower base.
Further, in this case, I feel that the cut-out/cantilever starting above the third storey would be very effective in reducing the sense of bulk at grade, and that, for me, further mitigates any issues with the density being sought.
Last edited:
maestro
Senior Member
I love the design too which is why I suggested transferring density from other sites to make it work. As it stands right now, the design and tiny floor plate are irrelevant when it comes allowing the proposed 35 to 40 FSI. It opens the door for other developers to build as dense. They could have much larger sites that allow for larger fatter buildings. That is how Toronto developers tend to build afterall. The only reason this is thin is because the site is so small. The community's amenities and infrastructure would be quickly overwhelmed at those residential densities.
PMT
Senior Member
A new hearing has been scheduled for March 26, 2018.
ADRM
Senior Member
City Council in its meeting this week passed a Request for Directions motion pursuant to this development; there are a couple new details in the preamble:
The applicant has again revised the development proposal for 874-878 Yonge Street and 3-11 Scollard Street, reducing the overall height from 51 storeys to 46 storeys, and 179 metres to 154.8 metres. The gross floor area has been reduced from 243,234 metres to 220,529 metres. The revised plans, drawings and revised elevations, and revised shadow study are attached to this report as Attachments 1, and 2, and are on file with the City Clerk for the purpose of the City Council meeting of March 26, 27 and 28, 2018. These revisions were provided through the applicant's witness statements.
The purpose of this report is to request further instructions for the Ontario Municipal Board hearing that is scheduled to commence March 26, 2018.
The applicant has again revised the development proposal for 874-878 Yonge Street and 3-11 Scollard Street, reducing the overall height from 51 storeys to 46 storeys, and 179 metres to 154.8 metres. The gross floor area has been reduced from 243,234 metres to 220,529 metres. The revised plans, drawings and revised elevations, and revised shadow study are attached to this report as Attachments 1, and 2, and are on file with the City Clerk for the purpose of the City Council meeting of March 26, 27 and 28, 2018. These revisions were provided through the applicant's witness statements.
The purpose of this report is to request further instructions for the Ontario Municipal Board hearing that is scheduled to commence March 26, 2018.
ThomasJ
Active Member
GFA of 220,529 sq. meters? not.
Well, luckily they're not fuelling up an airliner here.
42
42
ADRM
Senior Member
There are now two continuations scheduled for the 19th and 23rd of April.
ADRM
Senior Member
Apparently the LPAT has ruled in favour of the 46-storey alternate proposal, with the order subject to the completion of the regular SPA process.
Marcanadian
Moderator
^ The details of that decision have now been posted:
2019 CanLII 81692 (ON LPAT) | Yonge & Scollard Development Inc. v Toronto (City) | CanLII
Access all information related to judgment Yonge & Scollard Development Inc. v Toronto (City), 2019 CanLII 81692 (ON LPAT) on CanLII.
www.canlii.org
Marcanadian
Moderator
Application Information Centre
Search for details about current planning applications and Minor variance and Consent applications. Application Information Centre For best results, please use the latest version of Microsoft IE/Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. As of July 30th, the Application Information Centre has...
app.toronto.ca
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Excellent news - curtain wall, marble finish at ground level. The grid is structural.
AoD
AoD