Toronto 145 St George | 95.64m | 28s | Tenblock | a—A

evandyk said:
It is hard to believe that in a city in a housing crisis, the only way to build is to tear down perfectly good existing rental units. Who thinks this is good planning, policy or outcome?
Click to expand...
It is the predictable result of constraining the supply of developable land.

I am sure the proponent would prefer not having the extra risks and costs associated with demolition, providing rental replacement units, and having many dozens of existing residents to work their timeline around.
 
Northern Light said:
A single new E-W Street between Eglinton and Lawrence, running for 10km, with simple 'Avenues' Zoning (that could include buffers to adjacent SFH areas would deliver over 20,000 units of housing, conservatively, assuming a max height of 8 storeys.)
Click to expand...
If this proposal was a school project, I could appreciate it on a certain level. However this Baron Hausmann urban-planning approach to turning Glencairn Avenue into a Grand Boulevard (while expropriating/demolishing hundreds of some of the most expensive houses in the city between Bathurst and Yonge) is such a non-starter on so many levels, it reminded me of the story about the "missing" subway station on the Yonge line between Eglinton and Lawrence. Why is there no station at Glencairn at Yonge, while there is one on the Spadina line? Because the North Toronto Ratepayers did not want a station that would attract hi-rise development. This is the world we still live in.
 
thecharioteer said:
If this proposal was a school project, I could appreciate it on a certain level. However this Baron Hausmann urban-planning approach to turning Glencairn Avenue into a Grand Boulevard (while expropriating/demolishing hundreds of some of the most expensive houses in the city between Bathurst and Yonge) is such a non-starter on so many levels.......
Click to expand...

I was actually thinking of the east end:

1623271760982.png


But that aside..........you're far too offended.

There is no project.

It was a quick example of what could be achieved, a theoretical one.

I could just as easily have said between 'Lawrence and Ellesmere'.

It was to illustrate what can be achieve while causing relatively little disturbance to much of the SFH area; yet still providing substantial new density.

I'm not expropriating anyone's home.

That said, massive intensification/development is already occuring and is likely to continue unabated. People will find they have to come up with concepts they prefer, if they wish to avoid others.

The status-quo, is not really on the table.


thecharioteer said:
Why is there no station at Glencairn at Yonge, while there is one on the Spadina line? Because the North Toronto Ratepayers did not want a station that would attract hi-rise development. This is the world we still live in.
Click to expand...

North Toronto has opposed the vast majority of development at Yonge and Eglinton; and lost across the board.

They turfed a City Councillor for supporting one development, to find far more happening under the next.

While I'm not the champion of any specific proposal on Glencairn (that was your idea)..........

Development is coming, at scale, to that area of Yonge. (also nothing to do with me)
 
Mentioned in this Gleaner article:

NEWS: The race to preserve Annex heritage (July 2021)

gleanernews.ca gleanernews.ca


Should the city decide to approve the West Annex as an HCD (Heritage Conservation District), it will not be a blanket heritage designation: only those properties considered to have heritage value will require permits for any modifications that are visible from the street. Grants and tax rebates to help with the cost of conservation will also be available to owners of listed or designated heritage properties. All other properties will still have to negotiate with city planning (heritage) if a demolition permit is sought, to ensure their replacements fit in with the streetscape and use appropriate massing and materials.

Heritage controls provided by an HCD could avoid explosive situations like the one currently playing out at 145 St. George, where tenants are consulting with MPP Bell and Councillor Layton on how to protect their rent-controlled apartments from being demolished for a 29-storey rental and condominium tower.

If this mid-century modernist apartment were deemed to have heritage value—and an HCD will apply a broader definition of heritage that includes modern architecture— the developers would have to negotiate with city planning from the outset to demonstrate how the property would be preserved or integrated into a new development.

The entire community is invited to participate in a virtual kick-off meeting on September 23.
Click to expand...
 
Community engagement website:

Homepage - 145 St. George

We invite you to discover the vision, get all of the information you need, ask questions and provide feedback, all in one place.
145stgeorge.com 145stgeorge.com


There's also a virtual consultation meeting set for October 20, 2021:

toronto.webex.com

Meet virtually with Cisco Webex. Anytime, anywhere, on any device.

Simple, modern video meetings for everyone on the world's most popular and trusted collaboration platform.
toronto.webex.com toronto.webex.com


Event Information: 145 St. George - Community Consultation Meeting

Date and time:Wednesday, October 20, 2021 6:00 pm
Eastern Daylight Time (Toronto, GMT-04:00)
Change time zone
Duration:2 hours
Description:
This is a Community Consultation Meeting to discuss an application the City has received respecting 145 St. George Street to amend the Zoning By-law to allow for a 29-storey residential building containing 341 dwelling units (130 rental replacement units). A below-grade parking garage containing 93 vehicle parking spaces and 310 bicycle parking spaces is proposed along with 1 vehicle parking space and 35 bicycle parking spaces at grade.

Please visit the City's Application Information Centre website at "www.toronto.ca/145StGeorgeSt" for more information.
 
DavidCapizzano said:
Just bumping as a reminder that the community meeting for this is tonight at 6
Click to expand...
I particularly liked the moment when the final caller asked Mike Layton why we aren't upzoning the entire city and especially the low-rise residential areas near the site.
 
WislaHD said:
I particularly liked the moment when the final caller asked Mike Layton why we aren't upzoning the entire city and especially the low-rise residential areas near the site.
Click to expand...

What was his answer?
 
ushahid said:
his eyes look like he is going to pop a nerve or two.
Click to expand...
Yes, he's probably trying to wrap his mind around the last caller's comments during the Community Consultation meeting, as they were filled with misinformation. His analogy that California has some of the loosest zoning regulations with relation to development projects was completely false. Most large California cities have some of the most complex zoning laws in North America. Anyways, Mike Layton's concerns will be focused on the local communities issues with the proposed project and whether evicting one set of residents from a good standing moderately priced large rental building to build a condominium tower that won't even come online for 5-6 years is really making the cities affordable housing crisis any better.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top