ferusian
Active Member
Last edited:
Toronto 2540 Gerrard East | 95.57m | 29s | Conservatory Group | Richmond Architects
- Thread starter ferusian
- Start date
Northern Light
Superstar
On balance, not looking forward to development of these lands.
First, because it's a huge 'natural' space including wetlands and meadow habitat, and is well patronized by area residents.
The natural was never intended, nor has it been assisted at all, and as such there are a number of issues with it; but nothing that couldn't be addressed.
Second, because the density is at the wrong end of the site.
If this combined area were to be redeveloped, the density should all be up against Victoria Park, where there is a second bus route; a subway station within 3 blocks or so, and a critical mass of shopping as well.
Instead we get density slanted to the east side of the site, where there is only a 20M bus route, shopping is a 5-10M walk, and the subway station just a bit too far for most to consider it walkable (about 1km and change).
At the end of the day, it'll be fine. But this could have been so much better.
Largely the fault of Conservatory Group who declined a land-swap with the City.
Though let's also add that density on the eastern lands was in place going back decades and predicated on the Scarborough Expressway running through here.
I'm not sure i understand how zoning like that wasn't made conditional and therefore of no force and effect when the highway wasn't built.
Here's a neat picture from before the nature or the plaza; when this site was largely a quarry, in 1958
Image Credit: http://www.yorku.ca/anderson/envs3740/quarrylands.pdf
Perspective is facing west from Warden Avenue at the bottom of the picture.
The railyard in the distance began at Victoria Park Avenue and ran to Main Street.
The factory complex on the north side of the rail yard was the Ford Factory before it moved to Oakville. It is still standing at part of the 'Shopper's World' complex and is primarily a Lowe's now.
ProjectEnd
Superstar
Interesting - this is also essentially where Symmetry's Tree House Lofts didn't work out a couple of years ago. I wonder who's putting forward 33 storeys of condos in the same area?
WislaHD
Superstar
With increased frequency to the 135 bus, I think this area could sustain higher density.
I wish there was more cooperation across the area between the various land-owners. Highest density should be at Victoria Park.
I wish there was more cooperation across the area between the various land-owners. Highest density should be at Victoria Park.
AlbertC
Superstar
The Conservatory Group & Richmond Architects:
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
Lenser
Senior Member
Ugh.
Towered
Senior Member
WislaHD
Superstar
Don't you just love massing models/renderings where they couldn't even bother to put the design in context?
This is the kind of design that shows up in Markham and we roll our eyes on.
This is the kind of design that shows up in Markham and we roll our eyes on.
jje1000
Senior Member
Yay, a vertical cul-de-sac!
Northern Light
Superstar
The Conservatory Group & Richmond Architects:
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...
View attachment 261755
View attachment 261756
View attachment 261757
View attachment 261758
Garbage.
Wrong side of this site to begin with, though that argument is a lost cause; this density should have been up against Victoria Park, not at the far east end, much further from retail and walkability and more frequent transit.
That aside, if you must put this density on this side................this is bland, sterile and adds nothing to its surroundings.
I honestly hope this doesn't sell and they lose their shirts on it.
Would serve them right.
Lenser
Senior Member
Too bad the Symmetry project fell through. It was miles better than this. This has pretty much zero personality.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
This was never the exact site of the Symmetry project. That project was across the street at 2535 Gerrard East.
This site, like most Conservatory sites, has been owned by them and zoning approved for years and years. They have a huge portfolio of zoning approved sites that they are very, ever so slowly building out with exactly the same Richmond schlock.
This site, like most Conservatory sites, has been owned by them and zoning approved for years and years. They have a huge portfolio of zoning approved sites that they are very, ever so slowly building out with exactly the same Richmond schlock.
Lenser
Senior Member
I stand corrected then. Same immediate area, anyway. But yeah, schlock is right. Drab slabs.
christiesplits
Senior Member
Very mundane circa 2005 design.
This will have quite the impact on the east end skyline. I anticipate a lot of local NIMBYism from the adjacent Blantyre neighbourhood.
This will have quite the impact on the east end skyline. I anticipate a lot of local NIMBYism from the adjacent Blantyre neighbourhood.
AlbertC
Superstar
That's the Conservatory Group for ya. We could be discussing upcoming condos elsewhere 10 years from now and they'd still be peddling this crap.