Toronto 705 Warden Avenue | 63.4m | 19s | CreateTO | superkül

Marcanadian

Marcanadian

Moderator
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 30, 2007
Messages
4,001
Reaction score
11,078
705 WARDEN AVE
Ward 20 - Scarborough District

Housing Now Initiative The application comprises the following: Building A - 7 storey mid-rise building fronting on Warden Avenue having a gross floor area of 11,790 square metres, 142 residential units and 98 vehicular parking spaces. Building B - 8 storey mid-rise building fronting on Warden Avenue having a gross floor area of 10,410 square metres, 120 residential units, 84 vehicular parking spaces and 1 type "G" loading space. Building C - 18 storey building fronting on a new public road having a gross floor area of 15,950 square metres, 216 residential units, 150 vehicular parking spaces and 1 type "G" loading space. A new public park adjacent to the existing public park and a new public road is proposed. CreateTO staff have advised that a Plan of Subdivision Application will be submitted in the near future. Note - The Housing Now Initiative mandates commenting agencies to provide comments by August 6, 2019.

634ewawda.JPG
32rqdws.JPG
46u5erds.JPG
67turfd.JPG
423wefas.JPG


app.toronto.ca

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. The Application Information Centre allows you to: Search by...
app.toronto.ca app.toronto.ca
 
It is honestly so frustrating seeing how little density these housing now sites are going for. You have this development site right next door to the subway and you are proposing 478 units on what amounts to more or less 7.5 acres? Are you nuts? a lot of townhouse developments have higher densities than that.!

This size site should be aiming for at least twice that unit count.
 
Marcanadian said:
705 WARDEN AVE
Ward 20 - Scarborough District

Housing Now Initiative The application comprises the following: Building A - 7 storey mid-rise building fronting on Warden Avenue having a gross floor area of 11,790 square metres, 142 residential units and 98 vehicular parking spaces. Building B - 8 storey mid-rise building fronting on Warden Avenue having a gross floor area of 10,410 square metres, 120 residential units, 84 vehicular parking spaces and 1 type "G" loading space. Building C - 18 storey building fronting on a new public road having a gross floor area of 15,950 square metres, 216 residential units, 150 vehicular parking spaces and 1 type "G" loading space. A new public park adjacent to the existing public park and a new public road is proposed. CreateTO staff have advised that a Plan of Subdivision Application will be submitted in the near future. Note - The Housing Now Initiative mandates commenting agencies to provide comments by August 6, 2019.

View attachment 195363View attachment 195359View attachment 195360View attachment 195361View attachment 195362

app.toronto.ca

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. The Application Information Centre allows you to: Search by...
app.toronto.ca app.toronto.ca
Click to expand...

Absent detailed renders, I'll stick to commenting on the facts in the submission.

I have identified 2 related concerns, flooding (and water retention); and erosion as well as other shortcomings in the proposal.

As laid out the public road will encroach 4M into the 'stable top of bank' of 10M mandated by the TRCA.

I see this as a real problem, Toronto creeks are already very erosion prone, particularly during heavy storm flows.

In terms of an ideal for safety and nature, its worth noting that outside the City the TRCA mandate is 30M from stable top of bank.

The 10M is already a compromise position in a highly urbanized area, to further encroach is poor precedent and unwise, moreover to have a public proponent do so sets a terrible example.

***

On flooding/water-retention, the proposal does not include any grand aspirations, seeking the bare minimum of 5mm of retention. This, notwithstanding their own reports which show that current outfall into the creek is already
below the level of the 25-year storm.

This makes the risk of water backing up rather substantial.

A more ambitious target should be mandated here, I would suggest a minimum of 30mm of on-site retention; and consideration of rebuilding and increasing in height the current outfall.

****

I'll add there doesn't appear to have been any consideration to extending the bike path from St. Clair Ravine in the east (other side of subway tracks), under those tracks, and then along the stable top of bank to Warden.

I think that's regrettable.

I'm not suggesting this proposal should have to eat the cost of that infrastructure, only that it should be laid out in a way that makes such construction possible in the future.


****

Finally, the transportation plan makes no reference whatever to bikesharing, or to carsharing, in a site focused on affordable housing right next to a subway station!!!!
 
Last edited:
innsertnamehere said:
It is honestly so frustrating seeing how little density these housing now sites are going for. You have this development site right next door to the subway and you are proposing 478 units on what amounts to more or less 7.5 acres? Are you nuts? a lot of townhouse developments have higher densities than that.!

This size site should be aiming for at least twice that unit count.
Click to expand...

I don't take any issue w/your idea subject to that density coming in form of height and not at the expense of greenspace.
 
Northern Light said:
I don't take any issue w/your idea subject to that density coming in form of height and not at the expense of greenspace.
Click to expand...
height, and that park is way too large. The existing park here is already massive, housing units are needed more than green space. Put that Community Benefits Package cash somewhere else, like, say, more affordable housing.

First thought is to eliminate the parkland dedication or at least reduce it to 5%, move the loop road north to reduce total road dedication space, integrate the TTC office space into a podium level, and add another 2-3 towers. There is a ton of space here. There is no reason whatsoever we shouldn't be looking at 1200+ units.
 
innsertnamehere said:
height, and that park is way too large. The existing park here is already massive, housing units are needed more than green space. Put that Community Benefits Package cash somewhere else, like, say, more affordable housing.

First thought is to eliminate the parkland dedication or at least reduce it to 5%, move the loop road north to reduce total road dedication space, integrate the TTC office space into a podium level, and add another 2-3 towers. There is a ton of space here. There is no reason whatsoever we shouldn't be looking at 1200+ units.
Click to expand...

The existing park is not large! It can't even support a single regulation size sports field. The north end (playground) has buildings intruding into it and uneven slopes that are not usable area.

The total usable space is no more than 1ha or 2.5 acres.

I would not support less parks space.
 
Northern Light said:
The existing park is not large! It can't even support a single regulation size sports field. The north end (playground) has buildings intruding into it and uneven slopes that are not usable area.

The total usable space is no more than 1ha or 2.5 acres.

I would not support less parks space.
Click to expand...
regulation size soccer fields have no place 300m from a subway station. This park should just be an urban amenity for the condos, put the soccer fields elsewhere.

Looking at it, there is already a soccer field in a massive park about 500m away at Clairlea Park. This area is not underserved by parkland - it actually has access to a pretty incredible amount of green space.

This city is in a housing crisis, it isn't going to be solved by building massive parks nobody needs and densities that are way below what is expected by provincial planning regulation.
 
innsertnamehere said:
HousingNowTO has backed up my assertions that this is ridiculously underdeveloped, coming up with a reasonable scheme to create 1,500 units here, 500 of which are affordable.

This is triple the unit count the city is proposing.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1156571047514296322
Click to expand...

Do they have a website where their proposal(s) can be studied? I didn't find the Twitter link particularly revelatory.
 
PS for those who wish to provide feedback on this proposal.

That can be sent to Jacky Li of Swerhun Facilitation at jli@swerhun.com

The requested deadline is today, July 31.
 
Final Report is up:


The density is still too low, but there have been some positive changes; several of my concerns have been addressed!

The proposal now mandates space for both carshare and bikeshare.

The proposal removed the encroachment into the ravine lands (inside the 10M setback requirement), and the City is now committed to fully naturalizing, with native plants, all areas of the site abutting the creek!

TTC site remains; now described as 'operations centre' and 'up to 4 storeys'.

From the report:

1580917564202.png

1580917582910.png
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top