Toronto 415 Yonge | 231m | 66s | Marwest | Kirkor Architects

I don't really care about the building, but I've always liked the look of the park there and thought it would be an ideal spot for a patio. It's a shame the new design calls for it to be demolished. 😢
 
Natika33 said:
I don't really care about the building, but I've always liked the look of the park there and thought it would be an ideal spot for a patio. It's a shame the new design calls for it to be demolished. 😢
Click to expand...

For clarity, the park proposed for removal is the patch of grass at the rear of the property, not the parkette space between this and the apartment to the north.

This is what's proposed to be removed:

1663716509190.png


Not this:

1663716546129.png


That said, the proposal does not engage the space above in the way I feel it ought to. I also like the idea of a restaurant here. I wouldn't want to see a private patio, in the public park; but I think a patio on the adjacent private lot or even just big open-able windows that would animate the space.

***

I don't recall if there's a specified parkland acquisition in the plan here, but if not, one could reasonably champion acquiring these lands to add on to Joseph Sheard Park:

1663716417840.png


Joseph Sheard Park :

1663716684583.png
 
Last edited:
Northern Light said:
For clarity, the park proposed for removal is the patch of grass at the rear of the property, not the parkette space between this and the apartment to the north.

This is what's proposed to be removed:

View attachment 427920

Not this:

View attachment 427921

That said, the proposal does not engage the space above in the way I feel it ought to. I also like the idea of a restaurant here. I wouldn't want to see a private patio, in the public park; but I think a patio on the adjacent private lot or even just big open-able windows that would animate the space.

***

I don't recall if a specified parkland acquisition in in the plan here, but if not, one could reasonably champion acquiring these lands to add on to Joseph Sheard Park:

View attachment 427919

Joseph Sheard Park :

View attachment 427922
Click to expand...
Oh good! Yes, I hope the new proposal capitalizes on using that side more. It could truly be something quite magical.
 
This one was the subject of a report to the last meeting of City Council, the attachments for which were confidential; but no longer.

*** Except (maybe I need more coffee) I can't find the actual recommendation in the reports. It looks to me as though it was a recommendation to accept the revised proposal already published in this thread, but I don't see that wording.

 
Northern Light said:
This one was the subject of a report to the last meeting of City Council, the attachments for which were confidential; but no longer.

*** Except (maybe I need more coffee) I can't find the actual recommendation in the reports. It looks to me as though it was a recommendation to accept the revised proposal already published in this thread, but I don't see that wording.

Click to expand...
The Confidential Attachment may not be confidential anymore… but it's not linked here:


42
 
...I keeping thinking of something growing a bad case mold every time I look at the current renedering for this. /sigh
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top