Toronto 1000 Bathurst Street | 16.93m | 5s | 2031430 Ontario Ltd

[Adrienne]

1000 Bathurst - Finally people are waking up to Bathurst Street!

I am grateful that this eyesore is going to turn into something positive. Six stories is nothing in the scheme of things. Anyone that wants to put money into changing and growing this depressing strip of Bathurst has my support. Now let's get moving on the rest of it.

Looks like things are about to get moving on this one. A committee of adjustment application will be submitted soon for variances including 'height, setbacks, and angular plane penetration' (to quote Adam Vaughan's office).

The applicant has described the project as follows:

'The project looks to spur further development along a stale stretch of
Bathurst St. with a building that fits with the neighborhood
architecturally. This has been an area that has been designated by the
City for intensification guided by the mid rise principles. The project
will also be designed as energy efficient as economically possible.
Right now we are looking to design the building at 25% more energy
efficient than the O.B.C. requires. Lastly, the project aims to bring
high quality Loft Like Units 'for rent' in the area geared to upper year
grad students and young professionals'

Seems pretty tall for the area and also for the width of the lot. Any thoughts?

 

[cdr108]

I have half a dozen plans and elevations uploaded here:

https://www.yousendit.com/download/M3BuYURLU1A4NVdybHNUQw

Let me know if it works.

thanks lemur.
i could only see 1st floor plans and all the elevations ... nothing for 2-6 floor. :-(

this building is built almost right up to the property lines all around !
i thought there was a requirement for setbacks of 3 feet between buildings on each side ?
or is it because the current buildings are 'attached' so they can get away with it?

i don't like the Georgian style, if that's what it is.

it reminds me of a conversation i had with a friend when we walked by the recent stacked THs developed in Liberty Village on our way to the homeshow at CNE.


http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&su...esult&ct=title&resnum=1&sqi=2&ved=0CCMQ8gEwAA

i believe these THs were built within the past 5 yrs but they went with a traditional style instead of going contemporary. :-(
IMO that was a missed opportunity. why go old if you're building glass towers down the road ???

 

[the lemur]

thanks lemur.
it reminds me of a conversation i had with a friend when we walked by the recent stacked THs developed in Liberty Village on our way to the homeshow at CNE.


http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&su...esult&ct=title&resnum=1&sqi=2&ved=0CCMQ8gEwAA

i believe these THs were built within the past 5 yrs but they went with a traditional style instead of going contemporary. :-(
IMO that was a missed opportunity. why go old if you're building glass towers down the road ???

That seems to link to College St just west of University. Where in LV did you see these stacked THs?

I'm not a fan of whatever this style is, but the consensus in the neighbourhood seems to be that the proposed building is 'big but better than nothing'. People just want that boarded-up firetrap gone.

 

[cdr108]

That seems to link to College St just west of University. Where in LV did you see these stacked THs?

I'm not a fan of whatever this style is, but the consensus in the neighbourhood seems to be that the proposed building is 'big but better than nothing'. People just want that boarded-up firetrap gone.

i dont know why the link went to somewhere else ...

google map Strachan Avenue at East Liberty Street, Toronto, ON

 

[Torontovibe]

It's unfortunate that there's no retail for this project, but I think trading out a few sad corner stores and empty shops for a new apartment building is reasonable.

It's too bad retail is not included in this because once this street is redeveloped, it could become a great retail street. I'd love to see it lined with 6 to 12 story buildings and retail or community/cultural spaces, all along Bathurst. A cinema would be nice too, around Collage. St.

 

[Primavera]

I'm betting those who think it is a great idea to build a 6 story building here don't live on Rossmore. Anyone? ...didn't think so.

 

[Ramako]

I'm betting those who think it is a great idea to build a 6 story building here don't live on Rossmore. Anyone? ...didn't think so.

Your comment implies that nobody here would possibly want a large development built if it happened to be close to their own house, simply by virtue of that reason alone. That is pure and classical NIMBYism, and I think you'll have a hard time finding it on this forum.

 

[Primavera]

Your comment implies that nobody here would possibly want a large development built if it happened to be close to their own house, simply by virtue of that reason alone. That is pure and classical NIMBYism, and I think you'll have a hard time finding it on this forum.

I realize that my comment is pure and classical NIMBYism. Again, though, I am willing to bet that those people who have spoken out so clearly in favour of this development will not have it erected abutting their backyard.

FYI, I live in the neighbourhood, though not on Rossmore, and I could understand why somebody there would have serious issues with this proposal. As has been pointed out already here, with the exception of the seniors home this structure is higher by far than anything else in that stretch.

 

[Tulse]

I live in the neighbourhood, though not on Rossmore, and I could understand why somebody there would have serious issues with this proposal.

It sounds like your complaint is not with this specific proposal, but with the general principle of intensification and mid-rise construction along this section of Bathurst. And if that is your concern, then your objection is with the City, since it has designated this area for intensification.

 

[the lemur]

I don't have a problem with intensification and mid-rises in principle, nor with their arrival in this neighbourhood specifically (disclosure: I live in the area as well). However, it's not just a question of building something that meets those criteria but also of how it will relate to the context in which it is built.

The area outlined in red is the current structure (the area outlined in blue has been demolished since the photo was taken). The yellow lines are laneways used by local residents for access to parking. The proposed development will need to take into account the use of the laneways and the resulting impact on traffic from Bathurst and within the neighbourhood.

 

[Tulse]

The proposed development will need to take into account the use of the laneways and the resulting impact on traffic from Bathurst and within the neighbourhood.

Absolutely -- all development needs to be sensitive to its existing context. But that's different than Primavera's seeming unbending opposition to any development at all in this area.

 

[the lemur]

It's not a black and white issue. There probably are people opposed to such developments just because they live near them, but I doubt they'd prefer these two properties remain as decrepit fire traps.

Primavera's assertion is that those in favour of this development (probably) don't live on Rossmore, because if they did they'd experience some kind of reduction in their quality of life merely because of its presence near them. But it doesn't necessarily follow that if you did live on Rossmore that it would actually have much of an impact on you at all.

 

[Primavera]

Absolutely -- all development needs to be sensitive to its existing context. But that's different than Primavera's seeming unbending opposition to any development at all in this area.

[^emphasis Primavera's]

That's an absurd conclusion, Tulse. In both of my comments I referred to the height of the proposed structure.

 

[Tulse]

In both of my comments I referred to the height of the proposed structure.

Fair enough, but my point is that it is the City itself which has designated this area as appropriate for mid-rise development. In other words, this project is in keeping with the City's general development principles for this area, so if there is a height objection, it's really with the City's approach to this area, rather than this specific project.

 

[Primavera]

Fair enough, but my point is that it is the City itself which has designated this area as appropriate for mid-rise development. In other words, this project is in keeping with the City's general development principles for this area, so if there is a height objection, it's really with the City's approach to this area, rather than this specific project.

I'm new to this ... is there a website where I can find this sort of information?