Toronto East Harbour | 214.2m | 65s | Cadillac Fairview | Adamson

evandyk said:
I believe that school is projected to be oversubscribed from the day it opens, due to the growth in canary, distillery, waterfront, etc.
Click to expand...
I think you are right based on what I last saw, but I've never quite understood that. I know it's probably not quite this simplistic, but since it's going to be a new school built on vacant land can't we just build it up higher to add more floors, classrooms, and even terraces for outdoor space?
 
Star Fox said:
I think you are right based on what I last saw, but I've never quite understood that. I know it's probably not quite this simplistic, but since it's going to be a new school built on vacant land can't we just build it up higher to add more floors, classrooms, and even terraces for outdoor space?
Click to expand...

From this report:


1656356751467.png

1656356769154.png

1656356850883.png


****

At WDL the site is already very maxed out.

At level of the school itself, there are height limitations based on the costs of setting up a school where lots of high capacity elevators and/or escalators would be required.

The province would have to approve funding for that; and keep in mind that consumes lots of space (it's not just the elevator(s); but the lobby/queue space you need around them; the most displaced space, the more floors required etc.

I believe for the TDSB's guidelines generally limit buildings to 3s (though some are 4s)....

That doesn't preclude a non-TDSB tower above, but you can't simply make the school portion 6s.

In this case, the roof is already play space as well.
 
Northern Light said:
From this report:


View attachment 410165
View attachment 410166
View attachment 410167

****

At WDL the site is already very maxed out.

At level of the school itself, there are height limitations based on the costs of setting up a school where lots of high capacity elevators and/or escalators would be required.

The province would have to approve funding for that; and keep in mind that consumes lots of space (it's not just the elevator(s); but the lobby/queue space you need around them; the most displaced space, the more floors required etc.

I believe for the TDSB's guidelines generally limit buildings to 3s (though some are 4s)....

That doesn't preclude a non-TDSB tower above, but you can't simply make the school portion 6s.

In this case, the roof is already play space as well.
Click to expand...
TDSB could/should get rid of the "below grade parking" for Teachers in a neighbourhood that's getting BILLIONS in new transit spending, right..?
 
HousingNowTO said:
TDSB could/should get rid of the "below grade parking" for Teachers in a neighbourhood that's getting BILLIONS in new transit spending, right..?
Click to expand...

I'd be entirely behind that; but at the very least, I want them to charge market price for that parking (not subsidize it); and test if there's enough teachers willing to pay that to justify the investment!
 
I think this best fits here (?): https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2022/ie/bgrd/backgroundfile-227973.pdf

Infrastructure and Environment Committee consideration on July 7, 2022
IE31.14
ACTION​
​
​
Ward: 14​
Broadview Avenue Extension Environmental Assessment​
Origin​
(June 23, 2022) Report from the General Manager, Transportation Services​
Recommendations​
The General Manager, Transportation Services recommends that:

1. City Council endorse the Preferred Designs for the Broadview Avenue Extension and New Street E, generally shown in Attachment 1 and 2 of this report.

2. City Council authorize the General Manager, Transportation Services to prepare the Environmental Study Report (ESR) for the Broadview Avenue Extension EA, issue the Notice of Completion, and post the ESR in the public record in accordance with the requirements of the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment process for Schedule C projects.

3. City Council direct the General Manager, Transportation Services, as part of the detailed design process which will include ongoing consultation with the local Councillor, area stakeholders, and the community to incorporate refinements to the design features of the Preferred Designs regarding, but not limited, to:

a. location and length of on-street vehicle lay-bys;

b. location and length of vehicle turning lanes;

c. location of power drops to support the film industry;

d. improvements at the intersection of Broadview Avenue and Queen Street East.

4. City Council direct the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, to prepare an Official Plan Amendment to reflect the planned right-of-way widths associated with the Preferred Concept for the existing segment of Broadview Avenue between Eastern Avenue and Queen Street East and hold a Statutory Public Meeting of the Toronto and East York Community Council.

5. City Council direct the General Manager, Transportation Services, to work with the Owner of the East Harbour development, Metrolinx, and Infrastructure Ontario on agreements necessary for completion of detailed design and construction of the Broadview Avenue Extension from Eastern Avenue to the south side of the Metrolinx rail embankment, and authorize the General Manager, Transportation Services to negotiate, enter into, and execute the necessary agreements, on terms and conditions satisfactory to the General Manager, Transportation Services, in relation to the detailed design, construction, and warranty of the Broadview Avenue Extension, and in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor.​

​
 
Last edited:
As per my speculation above...........the City of Toronto has confirmed that CF is indeed seeking an IMIT grant for this site.

In a last minute addition to the agenda for today's Eco. Dev Ctte meeting........a report recommends IMIT be given to Sanofi Pasteur for their plant expansion up on Steeles, but also touches on East Harbour.


From the above:

1657128739825.png


1657128829932.png


****

Of note, in light of the above; and the balance of the report, it would appear the City is indeed seeking to use IMIT as leverage, making very clear that it will not be a given.

The report on whether to award IMIT here is scheduled for Q1 2023.
 
I really dont know how much of anything useful the city will be able to extract by using the IMIT as "leverage" as they want to make it appear to be. I'd rather the city stop pissing away otherwise uncollected revenue that could be used to improve city services/departments, since they love to cry that they dont have money to do this, that, and the other.
 
Amare said:
I really dont know how much of anything useful the city will be able to extract by using the IMIT as "leverage" as they want to make it appear to be. I'd rather the city stop pissing away otherwise uncollected revenue that could be used to improve city services/departments, since they love to cry that they dont have money to do this, that, and the other.
Click to expand...

You and I agree that IMIT should go away.

But insofar as that has not yet happened; at the very least the City should make sure it secures some gains it might not otherwise achieve but for the money.

This office space won't get built if a major tenant isn't lined up.............

But assuming one is; and therefore that space is coming IMIT or no IMIT then the opportunity exists to secure any item on the City's wish list that was not secured via the MZO.

That could mean some form of preservation for the soap factory (or reconstruction of its idealized appearance); or it could mean a school or more affordable housing, amongst other options.

There is also clearly room to improve the public realm conceptually.
 
Last edited:
Given the recent rapid rise in vacancies, I’m really surprised CF is proceeding with building office towers right now.
 
allengeorge said:
Given the recent rapid rise in vacancies, I’m really surprised CF is proceeding with building office towers right now.
Click to expand...

Downtown Toronto AAA Commercial Office properties are only 4.6% vacant, in most cities, across most time periods, that would be considered a hot market; though it's certainly off from Toronto's recent peaks.

While overall downtown vacancy is 8.7%

Given a 3-4 year lag to occupancy, and the general rate of growth of Toronto, there is justification for more office space.

 
The Globe last week said Toronto overall is at 15% vacancy.
www.theglobeandmail.com

Toronto and Vancouver’s office vacancies on the rise as companies try to get rid of space

Both cities’ downtowns hollowed out during the pandemic with office employees working from home
www.theglobeandmail.com www.theglobeandmail.com

I think a lot of big companies are going to be reducing their office space over the next few years to reflect more work from home as their leases expire, but Toronto is generally booming in terms of jobs. I bet CF will be better than most of us at predicting future demand :)
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top