News   Sep 27, 2022
 972     1 
News   Sep 27, 2022
 870     0 
News   Sep 27, 2022
 1.6K     0 

502a-508 Yonge Street (KingSett Capital)

urbandreamer

recession proof
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
14,522
Reaction score
408
Location
renderpornstar.com
Well yes, perhaps 15s here. But why would KingSett buy this site without thinking it could be redeveloped? That's what they do--work with or flip to developers.

Of course they may be assembling the entire block.

With at least 2x50s towers across the street, I'd ask for at least 35s here.
 

gristle

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
2,314
Reaction score
6
So is this bye-bye to some original Yonge street frontages for more glass towers?
 
Last edited:

dt_toronto_geek

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
10,949
Reaction score
114
Location
Downtown Toronto
So is the bye-bye to some original Yonge street frontages for more glass towers?

No. Everything except Syd Silver from 508 Yonge & south to Grosvenor St. are listed heritage properties. Further, under the North Downtown Planning Framework this is designated low-rise. The 460 & 501 projects are, essentially, lost now but nothing will happen here. Just have to get that damn Framework completed and passed through Council which should be soon.
 

ThomasJ

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 24, 2011
Messages
735
Reaction score
24
No. Everything except Syd Silver from 508 Yonge & south to Grosvenor St. are listed heritage properties. Further, under the North Downtown Planning Framework this is designated low-rise. The 460 & 501 projects are, essentially, lost now but nothing will happen here. Just have to get that damn Framework completed and passed through Council which should be soon.


even if the framework process drags on, the fact remains that you are correct dt - there's nothing kingsett can do at this point with this site. the only applications that are technically ahead of the framework queue are 8 gloucester and 501/460 - though it's debatable how "ahead of the queue" 501 and 460 are given that they were submitted after the framework process was initiated.

said another way, 501 and 460 will get approved, but my opinion is that since they were somewhat late to the party so to speak they won't get what they've asked for (501 especially).
 

dt_toronto_geek

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
10,949
Reaction score
114
Location
Downtown Toronto
even if the framework process drags on, the fact remains that you are correct dt - there's nothing kingsett can do at this point with this site. the only applications that are technically ahead of the framework queue are 8 gloucester and 501/460 - though it's debatable how "ahead of the queue" 501 and 460 are given that they were submitted after the framework process was initiated.

said another way, 501 and 460 will get approved, but my opinion is that since they were somewhat late to the party so to speak they won't get what they've asked for (501 especially).

I don't really count 8 Gloucester as I kind of think of it as an "off Yonge" project, which I support where appropriate. I can't say this for certain, but until the North Downtown Planning Framework is actually implemented, I think that the 460 & 501 projects will most likely move forward, I just hope at reduced heights. I don't think it would be legally binding when it was in the study and consultation stages, only when it's approved by Council, presuming it will be.

Hahaha...only in Toronto
..through hell & high water, lets shove this framework down the councillors throats and get it quickly passed, to stop all this rampant out of control development.:D

In other words, let's keep shoving more crap glass highrises up where they don't belong, right?
The Framework should only be approved if it's a good plan, and I absolutely believe it to be. Nothing should be shoved down any Councillor's throat, they should consider every issue before them based on facts, public input, studies, EA's, reports from experts on a given topic, legal opinions and such then vote for what they believe is best for this city. If the plan for this group who bought these properties is to throw up yet another cheaply built, boring glass highrise then it should be denied at this location, and will be under the Framework.
Further, yes, development is moving too fast in Toronto now and not only are we getting far too many poor to mediocre buildings there's a house of cards that could very possibly come crumbling down here.
Finally, why don't we have even one iconic highrise like Absolute in Mississauga? Just one? Toronto is booming with construction unlike any city in North America and it's one of the largest cities on the continent with not one truly iconic building since the boom began. L Tower? Maybe. Ice? We'll see. To be sure we've had some really good highrises go up (mid-rises too) but nothing like Absolute - or better. We should have had several head-turning iconic highrises deserving of international attention but we haven't. Yet all the rage is throw up more crappy glass buildings and build higher and higher. I've nothing against height, as I always say, "where appropriate", but how about a some quality here over quantity.
End of rant.
 

Automation Gallery

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
12,654
Reaction score
3,263
Location
South Parkdale
I dont get it....Where they dont belong:confused:...to some obviously Yonge street is the "Sacred Cats Ass" and should not be touched.... to others, its just a dive, slowly deteriorating into the abyss.
What better place in the heart of the city to build, than the main drag serviced with 3 nearby rapid transit subway lines.
 

adma

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
16,997
Reaction score
1,604
No. Everything except Syd Silver from 508 Yonge & south to Grosvenor St. are listed heritage properties. Further, under the North Downtown Planning Framework this is designated low-rise. The 460 & 501 projects are, essentially, lost now but nothing will happen here. Just have to get that damn Framework completed and passed through Council which should be soon.

Unfortunately it's too late (i.e. it was a total demo job), but Syd Silver *should have been* listed. And no, not for the 50s false front per se (though that had its defenders), but because underneath was the rest of the listed row to the north. (Look carefully at the details and scale: behind its facade, the Syd Silver address would have finished a symmetrical row.)
 

a0th

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 14, 2012
Messages
57
Reaction score
0
In other words, let's keep shoving more crap glass highrises up where they don't belong, right?
The Framework should only be approved if it's a good plan, and I absolutely believe it to be. Nothing should be shoved down any Councillor's throat, they should consider every issue before them based on facts, public input, studies, EA's, reports from experts on a given topic, legal opinions and such then vote for what they believe is best for this city. If the plan for this group who bought these properties is to throw up yet another cheaply built, boring glass highrise then it should be denied at this location, and will be under the Framework.
Further, yes, development is moving too fast in Toronto now and not only are we getting far too many poor to mediocre buildings there's a house of cards that could very possibly come crumbling down here.
Finally, why don't we have even one iconic highrise like Absolute in Mississauga? Just one? Toronto is booming with construction unlike any city in North America and it's one of the largest cities on the continent with not one truly iconic building since the boom began. L Tower? Maybe. Ice? We'll see. To be sure we've had some really good highrises go up (mid-rises too) but nothing like Absolute - or better. We should have had several head-turning iconic highrises deserving of international attention but we haven't. Yet all the rage is throw up more crappy glass buildings and build higher and higher. I've nothing against height, as I always say, "where appropriate", but how about a some quality here over quantity.
End of rant.

maybe yall should chill on the iconic highrises and be glad that toronto is such a livable and vibrant city on the ground. can you draw me a picture of an iconic high rise from tokyo, berlin or sydney?
 

AlvinofDiaspar

Moderator
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
31,925
Reaction score
25,514
Location
Toronto
a0th:

I certainly can.

Tokyo: Mode Gakuen Cocoon Tower, Tokyo Metropolitan Government Building, not to mention Tokyo Tower, Tokyo Sky Tree
Berlin (which isn't much of a skyscraper town compared to say Frankfurt): Bahn Tower @ Potsdamer Platz, not to mention the Fernsehturm
Sydney: Aurora Place, Deutsche Bank Place

Besides, just how does building generic towers like that everywhere without consideration to the flow of urban form contributes to "livability"?

AoD
 

a0th

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 14, 2012
Messages
57
Reaction score
0
most of those aren't even high rises, if you're playing that game then we already have one of the most recognizable landmarks on the continent. and how nice the buildings look has nothing to do with how livable a city is, despite what the nerds on this forum think.
 

AlvinofDiaspar

Moderator
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
31,925
Reaction score
25,514
Location
Toronto
I agree with the general statement of "how nice the buildings look has nothing to do with how livable a city is" - but in the context of this debate it's about appropriate scaling and location of high-rises, not the design of such per se.

most of those aren't even high rises

For the sake of accuracy - really? Ignoring the three transmission towers I've listed, they are ALL high-rises.

AoD
 
Last edited:

buildup

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
2,208
Reaction score
294
There no reason we can't have livable streets AND iconic architecture for heaven's sake. They are not mutually exclusive. I am praying Oxford's plans at the conventional centre and Cumberland will raise the bar and perhaps get better designs into some of these imminent 70-80 story announcements.
 

dt_toronto_geek

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
10,949
Reaction score
114
Location
Downtown Toronto
I dont get it....Where they dont belong:confused:...to some obviously Yonge street is the "Sacred Cats Ass" and should not be touched.... to others, its just a dive, slowly deteriorating into the abyss.
What better place in the heart of the city to build, than the main drag serviced with 3 nearby rapid transit subway lines.

This link can help give an overview to your question much better than I can ever re-write it all - http://www.toronto.ca/planning/tallbuildingstudy.htm

Not indicated in the link above is the draft for the North Downtown Yonge Planning Framework that I drone on about, if your interested - http://www.toronto.ca/planning/pdf/northyonge_maps_feb16.pdf

It's not just Yonge Street that I'm concerned about, I address it directly most often because it's the highest profile heritage area close to where I live. I'd really like to see a progressive Councillor move to table a by-law that requires property owners of listed and designated buildings to keep their buildings in an attractive, safe, original state of repair and offer tax incentives for them to do so, similar to the heritage conservation program in Winnipeg. Signage placed on listed & designated buildings should also be addressed.
 

adma

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
16,997
Reaction score
1,604
Here's the kind of "highrise" in Berlin I like

9815395_1_l.jpg


(well, Hochhaus = highrise)
 

Top