ChesterCopperpot
Senior Member
Assume it's from Lifetime given that this site is their existing office
Toronto 49 Jackes | 70.35m | 19s | Lifetime | Turner Fleischer
- Thread starter ChesterCopperpot
- Start date
Assume it's from Lifetime given that this site is their existing office
AlbertC
Superstar
A pretty tucked away location. The address of 49 Jackes would be this building at the south side eastern end of the street, just before the edge of David Balfour Park.
According to ACO Toronto's website, they have this as a heritage property:
www.acotoronto.ca
According to ACO Toronto's website, they have this as a heritage property:
Toronto Architectural Conservancy - TO Built = 49 Jackes Avenue
Last edited:
Northern Light
Superstar
A pretty tucked away location. The address of 49 Jackes would be this building at the south side eastern end of the street, just before the edge of David Balfour Park.
According to ACO Toronto's website, they have this as a heritage property:
Toronto Architectural Conservancy - TO Built = 49 Jackes Avenue
View attachment 287916
49-51 read as a single address, there are 2 buildings on site, there is another behind this one.
Here's the aerial from the City's site:
49/51 is not listed or designated on the heritage register.
35 Jackes, beside it to the west is designated.
Site is roughly 24m x 40m or about 15,000ft2 assuming no other properties.
Northern Light
Superstar
Woodlawn, the road immediately adjacent to the south has several properties that I imagine a developer might take a run at.
Some very well-healed potential Nimbys for neighbours.............but.....
You've got this, non-listed property at 22 Woodlawn:
Immediately to the east of that, you have this rather pretty slope........the property is associated with the condo complex at the top.
To the east again, at 80 Woodlawn, you have this YWCA property:
To the north of this is the property which is the subject of this thread.
Some very well-healed potential Nimbys for neighbours.............but.....
You've got this, non-listed property at 22 Woodlawn:
Immediately to the east of that, you have this rather pretty slope........the property is associated with the condo complex at the top.
To the east again, at 80 Woodlawn, you have this YWCA property:
To the north of this is the property which is the subject of this thread.
ChesterCopperpot
Senior Member
Hariri Pontarini
UrbanAffair
Senior Member
wow, that's quite nice. I will believe it when I (hopefully) get to see it.
ProjectEnd
Superstar
25+ storeys of curved, curtain wall. I'll believe it when I see it...
D
DavidCapizzano
Guest
It looks like just the tightly rounded corners will use curved glass while the more shallow swoops will be flat panels. I would have liked to see more stone on the tower but if they can commit to this design and execute it well I don't really see any issues.
ushahid
Senior Member
depending on the quality it can end up looking like 7 St. Thomas or like Minto Yorkville.
Pow Wow
New Member
What happened to the pond and fountain in David A. Balfour Park? As part of the Rosehill Reservoir rehabilitation, said components were removed. Will they be restored? They provided the park with a unique, aesthetic feature that is sorely lacking in most of our public green spaces. I’d hate to permanently lose that for merely more grass.
Edit: I just saw the renovated park design. Figures that the City would destroy the lovely, swooping ponds, and the riverstone/fieldstone details in favour of some utterly meagre and useless new water feature. Those original pools of water and accompanying details should have been preserved, somehow, despite the rehabilitation of the reservoir.
Edit: I just saw the renovated park design. Figures that the City would destroy the lovely, swooping ponds, and the riverstone/fieldstone details in favour of some utterly meagre and useless new water feature. Those original pools of water and accompanying details should have been preserved, somehow, despite the rehabilitation of the reservoir.
Last edited:
UtakataNoAnnex
Superstar
Yeah, that's a grim reminder that developers can "bend" and stretch spamdrel into any curve and shape if they want to. /sigh
Lachlan Holmes
Active Member
Absolutely ridiculous underground parking situation here...
Of the four underground levels, P2 through P4 are the levels which hold the parking spaces and honestly, it looks like no less than 65% of each level is drive aisle, with about 18 spots per level.
Surely there is a more efficient solution than this...
(source: screenshot from the Architectural Plans)
Of the four underground levels, P2 through P4 are the levels which hold the parking spaces and honestly, it looks like no less than 65% of each level is drive aisle, with about 18 spots per level.
Surely there is a more efficient solution than this...
(source: screenshot from the Architectural Plans)
cd concept
Senior Member
I guess what parking slots you see on one side of the floor will reverse on the next level in the photo up above . What a waste of basement floors for parking etc ! They should use car elevators for a slim condo just like New York City does.
someMidTowner
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
The parking garage is proposed to lot lines like most developments. Ultra-slender garages with elevators are the product of small footprints common to Downtown Toronto, or like New York as you mentioned. So you're suggesting the developer leave a portion of their footprint unbuilt and build a slimmer tower? Then the rest of their property isn't utilized and you have a slim tower with a void of empty space next to it. In short, this makes zero sense.
rbt
Senior Member
I took it as a suggestion that the developer might excavate less than half the depth with the same lot coverage for the same number of parking spaces.