Toronto 1111 Danforth Avenue | 45.85m | 13s | Core Development | Studio JCI

Northern Light said:
Great! (Seriously) but not to throw a wrench in this........but I see a much larger opportunity here............

Let's see who owns the land immediately to the east of this site:

View attachment 472913

Oh hey, there's an entity the Councillor should have some pull with............and it's currently a 1s, non-descript building.
Click to expand...
We have been told that the TTC Subway Tunnels from DANFORTH LINE to GREENWOOD YARD run directly under the City Daycare building -- and it "cannot support any additional density on the Daycare lands above the shallow-tunnels".

Not a Civil-Engineer, so have to no way to fact-check that information and assessment.
1682716470776.png
 
HousingNowTO said:
We have been told that the TTC Subway Tunnels from DANFORTH LINE to GREENWOOD YARD run directly under the City Daycare building -- and it "cannot support any additional density on the Daycare lands above the shallow-tunnels".

Not a Civil-Engineer, so have to no way to fact-check that information and assessment.
View attachment 472918
Click to expand...

Hmmm, I'm not an engineer either, but I'd like to hear from a third party on this one......... The TTC has permitted significant towers over its tunnels in other spots.

Also, the E-W tunnel (to which the tracks linking to Greenwood yard meet at the north end).....isn't under Danforth, so the tunnel must pass under this as well:

1682717604080.png


Now, certainly, the tunnels could be a on a rising elevation here getting closer to the surface the further south they go.

This the tunnel portal in Greenwood yard:

1682717698087.png


It appears to be a little over 1s deep (roof line) at this point.

The portal is 200M south of Danforth, but ~160M south of the south lot line of the daycare site.

The width of the portal also appears to be less than the width of the daycare site, which would allow structural support beside the tunnels (in theory)

Hmmm, @smallspy might know the portal depth on approach to Danforth.
 
Northern Light said:
Hmmm, I'm not an engineer either, but I'd like to hear from a third party on this one......... The TTC has permitted significant towers over its tunnels in other spots.

Also, the E-W tunnel (to which the tracks linking to Greenwood yard meet at the north end).....isn't under Danforth, so the tunnel must pass under this as well:

View attachment 472924

Now, certainly, the tunnels could be a on a rising elevation here getting closer to the surface the further south they go.

This the tunnel portal in Greenwood yard:

View attachment 472925

It appears to be a little over 1s deep (roof line) at this point.

The portal is 200M south of Danforth, but ~160M south of the south lot line of the daycare site.

The width of the portal also appears to be less than the width of the daycare site, which would allow structural support beside the tunnels (in theory)

Hmmm, @smallspy might know the portal depth on approach to Danforth.
Click to expand...
The portal is actually 3 tunnels wide and the numerous tunnels and turns take place under that TCH building.
 
JBR said:
The portal is actually 3 tunnels wide and the numerous tunnels and turns take place under that TCH building.
Click to expand...

Good to know, thanks.

Worth saying though, the latter establishes that it's perfectly possible to build over top in principle.

If the 3 tunnels wide is entirely under the daycare centre then that does mean structure support would have to go on the lands to the east and west.
 
Northern Light said:
Good to know, thanks.

Worth saying though, the latter establishes that it's perfectly possible to build over top in principle.

If the 3 tunnels wide is entirely under the daycare centre then that does mean structure support would have to go on the lands to the east and west.
Click to expand...
I’ve often wondered this when driving the train what I’m driving under.
There is also a TCH complex on Chatham directly south of the daycare.
It seems they built only city structures above the WYE.
 
Northern Light said:
Councillor Fletcher with a motion to pursue redevelopment of the City owned lands adjacent to this site, that are discussed up thread, in partnership w/the developer here.


From the above:

View attachment 511299
View attachment 511300

@HousingNowTO will wish to make note.
Click to expand...

I briefly read Fletcher's newsletter at a Danforth coffee shop. It appears she wants to model the development off the recent Riverdale Co-op on Queen Street.
 
christiesplits said:
I briefly read Fletcher's newsletter at a Danforth coffee shop. It appears she wants to model the development off the recent Riverdale Co-op on Queen Street.
Click to expand...
For the record... the original not-for-profit Riverdale co-op proposal for that QUEEN STREET site was 80-units before it was scaled back to 32-units... and then scaled down further to the current 26-units...

NOT a model that we want to follow on Danforth.
 
HousingNowTO said:
For the record... the original not-for-profit Riverdale co-op proposal for that QUEEN STREET site was 80-units before it was scaled back to 32-units... and then scaled down further to the current 26-units...

NOT a model that we want to follow on Danforth.
Click to expand...

The site on Danforth is certainly capable of a fair bit more than 26 units.
 
Northern Light said:
The site on Danforth is certainly capable of a fair bit more than 26 units.
Click to expand...
100% - just underlining that the City (and the Councillor) will need to work to maximize the Affordable Housing opportunity on this Danforth site... which was not done on the Queen Street example.
 
Northern Light said:
Councillor Fletcher with a motion to pursue redevelopment of the City owned lands adjacent to this site, that are discussed up thread, in partnership w/the developer here.


From the above:

View attachment 511299
View attachment 511300

@HousingNowTO will wish to make note.
Click to expand...
"Councillor Paula Fletcher’s motion to look at new affordable supportive housing opportunities for 1117 Danforth CARRIES via show of hands..."
 
I’m unclear on one point re 1117 - Fletcher refers to the building as HLMS owned in the letter first shown on thread but some other posts above refer to the land as City owned. Is HLMS (which does not appear to be a City Agency) holding a lease on the land? Who will own the asset that results from this “opportunity”? https://www.hlms.ca/about-us/
 
HousingNowTO said:
View attachment 472909

Letter/Motion from Councillor Fletcher passed at P&H yesterday -

"The Planning and Housing Committee request the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning and the Executive Director, Housing Secretariat, in consultation with Houselink/ Mainstay Community Housing and the local Councillor, to review and report on all options to realize the redevelopment of 1117 Danforth as affordable supportive housing, including opportunities as part of the ongoing redevelopment of 1095-1111 Danforth Avenue."

Exploring expanding the parcel to the east to rebuild and incorporate the adjacent not-for-profit housing provider's lands into the CORE development proposal...

LINK - https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2023.PH3.22



View attachment 472911
Click to expand...

The discussion started here, now moves to its own thread with this proposal:

1117 Danforth Avenue (Houselink, 14s, Studio JCI)

This is a redux and expansion of affordable housing at the above address on Danforth. It will replace a lowrise affordable housing building with this new 14s proposal. Site as is: Application...
urbantoronto.ca urbantoronto.ca
 
The database has been updated to 12-storeys, as depicted in the submission at the adjacent 1117 Danforth. The renderings and other database fields are reflective of the previous 9-storey design, awaiting the anticipated official resubmission here.

1709919890294.png
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top