Urban Toronto - Powered by vBulletin
Project Essentials / dataBase – detailed project information, floor plans, renderings
Projects & Construction Thread  I  Real Estate Thread
Lakehouse Beach Residences
1960 Queen Street East , Toronto
Developer: Reserve Properties
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 53

Thread: Lakehouse Beach Residences (1960 Queen St E, Reserve Properties, 6s, Raw Design)

  1. Default Lakehouse Beach Residences (1960 Queen St E, Reserve Properties, 6s, Raw Design)






    For Immediate Release

    Contemporary design takes root in The Beach with Lakehouse

    June 7, 2011...Toronto – Adding a new contemporary la1nguage to The Beach, Lakehouse Beach
    Residences is settling into one of Toronto’s most established neighbourhoods.

    Architecture studio RAW has created a striking yet intimate condominium that presents
    floating glass enclosures of increasing size one inside the other. Contemporary glass walls
    are surrounded by smaller elements of masonry brick and IPE wood that mimic the scale and
    character of The Beach neighbourhood.

    “While design forward, Lakehouse settles into the neighbourhood quite well,” says Andrew
    Brethour, Toronto real estate expert and President of PMA Brethour.

    Tucked cleverly on the corner of Kenilworth Ave. and Queen Street East, Lakehouse represents a
    decidedly urban and design forward alternative to traditional condo living. “Rather than replace
    the existing fabric with a high rise development, Lakehouse adds density while preserving the
    context of its surroundings,” says Shane Fenton, VP of Reserve Properties.

    Reserve’s keen ability to acquire highly desirable locations on some of the city’s hottest streets
    has allowed them to develop a reputation for forward thinking urban mainstreet projects. From
    the sell-out success of Bellefair, which converts a former church in the heart of The Beach, to
    Motif Lofts and Towns on trendy Ossington Ave., and several others in the pipeline, the blended
    intuition of Reserve Properties’ father-son team is changing the landscape of Toronto.

    “We enjoy working together and bringing our combined passion to the neighbourhoods we
    work in,” says Shelley Fenton, President, Reserve Properties.

    In keeping with the spirit of The Beach, Lakehouse suites feature some of the largest outdoor
    living spaces in the city with grand luxurious terraces and wrap around balconies up to 1058 sq.
    ft., creating a seamless blend of indoor and outdoor living space. Lakehouse’s modern structure
    allows for terraces on upper floors to be set back and framed, “to feel more like outdoor
    rooms,” says Roland Rom Colthoff, Director, RAW.

    Lakehouse interiors are tailored for the refined tastes and individual styles of The Beach
    homeowner. In a neighbourhood where every front porch stands out from the next, Lakehouse
    offers 16 unique spacious floor plans in a boutique residence of only 28 units.

    With one and two bedroom open concept floor plans ranging from 550 sq. ft. - 1880 sq.
    ft., contemporary high-end Interiors by II by IV Design Associates include; Scavolini kitchen

    cabinetry with integrated and stainless steel European appliances by AEG and Leibherr,
    bathrooms featuring luxurious deep soaker bathtubs and frameless glass showers. Balconies and
    terraces all feature gas BBQ connections.

    “We know from our last project Bellefair, that the majority of purchasers are from the
    community. So we designed everything about Lakehouse for the people who want to live in The
    Beach,” says Shane Fenton.

    Echoing the residential greenery that surrounds it, Lakehouse residents are welcomed to their
    lakeside home with a soft landscaped promenade leading to an intimate entrance on Kenilworth
    Ave. Lakehouse also boasts enhanced retail along Queen Street East that opens up to the
    neighbourhood’s vibrant mainstreet.

    Priced from $349,000 to $1.4 million. Occupancy for Lakehouse is scheduled for November 2013.
    The Lakehouse sales centre will open mid June and is located at 2000 Queen Street East. Hours
    are Monday - Thursday 12 - 6 p.m., Saturday – Sunday 12-5 p.m.


  2. #2

    Default

    Nice addition to Queen East.

  3. #3

    Default

    Shouldn't take too long to sell, making this Licks not long for this world.

  4. #4

    Default

    Looks very similar to One Rainsford. With the church development and Rainsford II also coming, there is a real trend of low rise condos in the Beaches.

    I think this is great. The area needs more density, and these projects are exactly what the Avenues Plan envisions.

  5. #5

    Default

    ^ Agreed

  6. #6

    Default

    ^ Also agreed - I honestly think that the Beaches is one of the very few areas of Toronto (at least, on a major avenue) that is better off without any tall buildings.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Leslieville
    Posts
    2,052

    Default

    What a beautiful project. This is my favourite type of new build; crisp, modern, low/mid-rise, warm materials, and absolutely no faux-historicist detailing in site. We could use a lot more buildings like this in the neighbourhoods surrounding downtown, as well as the suburbs.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Davenport
    Posts
    2,791

    Default

    http://www.insidetoronto.com/news/lo...the-microscope

    Beach developments under the microscope

    Supporters of Glen Davis Ravine back at OMB Nov. 7

    JOANNA LAVOIE|Nov 04, 2011 - 12:51 PM



    Established in the spring, Friends of Queen Street was formed in response to a development application to build Lakehouse Beach Residences, a high-end six-storey, 29-unit condominium at 1960-1962 Queen St. E. near Kenilworth Avenue, the current home of Lick's Homeburgers.
    "We support development but development to the extent that it revitalizes the neighbourhood," said Simone Skopek, a 25-year area resident who serves as the group's spokesperson.

    "We're fearful of the falling-domino effect. The proposed Lick's development is out of character: too high, too dense and it sets a precedent for the rest of Queen Street East."
    Skopek said, adding members don't want the same faceless "economic desert" that exists west of Woodbine Avenue to happen eastward.
    The proposed project's developer, Reserve Investments, will be required to conduct a segment study (essentially a condensed avenues study) from Woodbine to Hambly avenues in an effort to explore the "what if" scenarios.
    Over on Kingston Road near Main Street, Friends of Glen Davis Ravine (FOGDR) - a non-profit community organization formed by local residents concerned about the negative impacts of a condominium proposal at 580-592 Kingston Rd. - is currently fighting to save their local green space from development at the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB).

  9. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by egotrippin View Post
    What a beautiful project. This is my favourite type of new build; crisp, modern, low/mid-rise, warm materials, and absolutely no faux-historicist detailing in site. We could use a lot more buildings like this in the neighbourhoods surrounding downtown, as well as the suburbs.
    I agree, and it's unfortunate to hear of locals opposing this project. It's the kind of scale that encourages density without high-rises or demolition of houses. Thus, this scale does more to preserve and enhance a neighbourhood's character than to detract from it. Furthermore, it may discourage out-of-context development in less affluent low-rise neighbourhoods that may be less prepared to oppose inappropriate high-rise development. It's good for historic low-rise neighbourhoods and the overall urban fabric of the city.

  10. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by junctionist View Post
    I agree, and it's unfortunate to hear of locals opposing this project. It's the kind of scale that encourages density without high-rises or demolition of houses. Thus, this scale does more to preserve and enhance a neighbourhood's character than to detract from it. Furthermore, it may discourage out-of-context development in less affluent low-rise neighbourhoods that may be less prepared to oppose inappropriate high-rise development. It's good for historic low-rise neighbourhoods and the overall urban fabric of the city.
    If anyone is interested, I am part of the group opposing this and would be hapy to expain why it is not appropriate and how it is actually contrary to the cities various policies.

  11. Default

    I agree, and it's unfortunate to hear of locals opposing this project.
    Then you don't understand the Beach mentality (which is distinctively different from the Beaches mentality). They are interested in a certain level of restoration and care about the type of businesses that move in....but aren't interested in any type of built-form changes. You'd have an easier time convincing residents of Algonquin Island to accept this building in their nabe.

  12. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by btg View Post
    If anyone is interested, I am part of the group opposing this and would be hapy to expain why it is not appropriate and how it is actually contrary to the cities various policies.
    I'm very interested. Respectful discussion of city-building issues like this one is what we're here for.

    Quote Originally Posted by freshcutgrass View Post
    Then you don't understand the Beach mentality (which is distinctively different from the Beaches mentality). They are interested in a certain level of restoration and care about the type of businesses that move in....but aren't interested in any type of built-form changes. You'd have an easier time convincing residents of Algonquin Island to accept this building in their nabe.
    It's not much of a change in the built form, though. The basic building along Queen Street has storefront businesses with residential units on top, achieving density and mix of uses without high-rise buildings. It's only slightly taller than what's there right now on a scale that's complimentary.

  13. Default

    It's not much of a change in the built form, though.
    he he....you don't get it.

    It isn't what is already there.

  14. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by junctionist View Post
    I'm very interested. Respectful discussion of city-building issues like this one is what we're here for.

    It's not much of a change in the built form, though. The basic building along Queen Street has storefront businesses with residential units on top, achieving density and mix of uses without high-rise buildings. It's only slightly taller than what's there right now on a scale that's complimentary.
    It is quite a change from what is here now.

    At the meeting in June, residents felt that the "glass box" doesn't fit in, plus there are serious concerns about traffic, parking, flooding, shadows on Queen (when similar ones are built - if this is a precedent) and more - like the impact on transit from more cars making left turns on the TTC streetcar and the short-turning that is frequent due to congestion.

    The buildings to the east are all one storey - and the owners are not planning on selling. Plus the segment study (which was completely inadequate) identified those properties as being unlikely to be redeveloped. The Lick's property only has a narrow right-of-way at the back - to develop the properties to the east really requires that the developer cede a 6m wide laneway - which isn't being required here.

    So for decades, we will have to look at this:

    Name:  Lick's - east wall.jpg
Views: 191
Size:  91.7 KB

    Plus, the Lion on the Beach is a heritage building tot he immediate west, on the other side of Kenilworth - and there are other 2 storey heritage buildings to the south.

    Here is the big problem - Queen in the Beach really should be a Heritage District - like Queen East of Spadina, so there are tough rules about new development.

    There were rules here before - the 1987 Queen East - The Beaches Urban Design Guidelines http://www.toronto.ca/planning/urbde...thebeaches.pdf . however, the secondary plan was not included (by the planners) in the 2002-2006 Official Plan. The guidelines were passed again in 2004, but are not part of the OP.

    In 2010, when the Avenues Guidelines were passed - Bussin and Fletcher REMOVED Queen from the Avenues & Midrise guidelines, though it is still an Avenue.

    The Avenues section of the Official Plan says that not all avenues will have growth. It also says that there is no "one size fits all" solution - but in passing the Avenues guidelines for every avenue without a previous Avenue Study by th ecity - hat is what we are getting - and worse, because if you look at the projects being submitted and approved, like the 2 on Dundas West 856 and 1243) they violate the height, angular planes and virtually every other guideline - same with one coming to Council for 988 College.

    The Avenues study calls for only "infill" in potential heritage areas, like Queen (Bylaw 1118-2008 defines many areas for HCD study). So, continuously, the planners and City set up very nice policies, then completely ignore them in practice.

    Under the Official Plan, the intensification of Avenues is not supposed to be haphazard and driven by the market - every avenue is supposed to have a city-driven Avenue Study to determine what it should look like - for example, avenue Road had one - it is 27m wide and redevelopment though is only supposed to be 22.5m tall instead of the usual 1:1 ratio.

    Development on an Avenue prior to an avenue Study was supposed to be very limited - only if they did a full study with traffic, shadows, infrastructure and showing how it would eventually be entirely developed to the same form (except where there were distinguishing characteristics to a property - like an odd shape etc.) - a mini-Avenue study but without the bylaw and for a shorter stretch.

    The official plan calls for designing streets so that the buildings "work together" - this is not what is happening. The official plan calls for transitions in building height - that is not being studied yet alone implemented.

    The city is supposed to be determining where growth occurs and when. We are getting intensification on every Avenue - with no attempt to preserve any as low-rise ones that work fine while directing change to the ones where redevelopment really would be positive - mostly in the suburbs like in scarborough. So we are going to get older Avenues which are an ugly mix of new and old buildings - where even if the final built form will be orderly in terms of built form, it would take decades before there will be enough development to make it happen.

    The city is not being planned - the need for intensification is used to justify anything and everything and other objectives are being ignored - when in fact, there is no panic to intensify as there is lots of appropriate land for intensification to meet the 3.08 million target in 2031 under provincial policy.

  15. Default

    Oh, and there are a couple of other things to mention.

    Here is a better image showing the potential view

    Name:  Picture1.jpg
Views: 205
Size:  18.1 KB

    The fire hall in the Beach is a local landmark - once one 6 storey building is allowed, then eventually development will block views of the tower - the clock is about 20m above grade - even if the rules are not violated, buildings under the Avenues guidelines can be 25m tall - 20m plus5m for mechanical penthouses etc.

    Name:  Fire Hall 227 – 1904 Queen Street East 2.jpg
Views: 196
Size:  94.8 KB

    Please visit our website - www.FoQS.ca - to see more images and get additional information on this project and why it should be refused and only more appropriate development should be permitted, in line with the 8-9 projects built under the Beaches Guidelines since 1987.
    Last edited by btg; 2012-Mar-13 at 16:46.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •