Toronto 543 Yonge Street | 228.85m | 68s | CentreCourt | Arcadis

Northern Light said:
Fair point; this is the argument made by the planners here:

View attachment 550309

Given your thoughts above, I did a quick measure and model. Assuming that it were possible and permissible to demo the heritage buildings but for their facades, and allowing for a respectful setback from same, were there no development on the site is the subject of this thread, that assembly to the south is a viable development site in my opinion; but only just barely, and HPS might beg differ (I modeled a 3M setback from the West, South and East) and 12.5M from the north (sharing a 25M separation); I get a floor plate of about ~675M2

Given that the tower proposed here is a mere 639M2 that may seem reasonable, but one does have a serious problem if you need to extract another 11.5M from this proposal's floor plate (its entirely non-viable)

Even if you went for 20M separation, that still slices 9M off, there's no way the proforma would work.

By my math the current proposal is about 20M N-S, so extracting 9M reduces you to an 11M wide building and a 350M2 floor plate, so that's not on.

Which is to say, when taken together, I believe this 2 property sets preclude putting up a building on both. The only way to fit 2 towers on this block would be acquire the condo at the corner w/Wellesley.
Click to expand...

The problem with that logic though (as I see it) is that rationale is nearly-equally applicable to the southern properties (but for the heritage aspect). A 675 floorplate w/ 12.5m separation to the north is a viable site. I just can't see property owner's on Yonge giving up their future development potential without serious compensation, either by way of an LDA or outright purchase of the strata rights to secure the separation. Even if this is supported by Staff/Council, I can't imagine there isn't an appeal from the southern owners unless the proponents enter into an agreement (which is always an option).
 
Msleylar said:
The problem with that logic though (as I see it) is that rationale is nearly-equally applicable to the southern properties (but for the heritage aspect). A 675 floorplate w/ 12.5m separation to the north is a viable site. I just can't see property owner's on Yonge giving up their future development potential without serious compensation, either by way of an LDA or outright purchase of the strata rights to secure the separation. Even if this is supported by Staff/Council, I can't imagine there isn't an appeal from the southern owners unless the proponents enter into an agreement (which is always an option).
Click to expand...

I don't think we actually said anything different, except that either site owner would have right to absolutely block any other tower, absent assembly north to Wellesley and;

In such a context, that could hold each other hostage to the exclusion of all development on the block. The City has not always required LDAs in such cases in the past, though it certainly has in some.
 
Definitely, to me this is a 'force them to the table application'. But when I look at the two potential tower sites, the southern site makes more sense as it can accommodate a tower without externalizing separation requirements to the site to the north, while this site can't say the same about the property to the south.
 
Northern Light said:
Fair point; this is the argument made by the planners here:

View attachment 550309

Given your thoughts above, I did a quick measure and model. Assuming that it were possible and permissible to demo the heritage buildings but for their facades, and allowing for a respectful setback from same, were there no development on the site is the subject of this thread, that assembly to the south is a viable development site in my opinion; but only just barely, and HPS might beg differ (I modeled a 3M setback from the West, South and East) and 12.5M from the north (sharing a 25M separation); I get a floor plate of about ~675M2

Given that the tower proposed here is a mere 639M2 that may seem reasonable, but one does have a serious problem if you need to extract another 11.5M from this proposal's floor plate (its entirely non-viable)

Even if you went for 20M separation, that still slices 9M off, there's no way the proforma would work.

By my math the current proposal is about 20M N-S, so extracting 9M reduces you to an 11M wide building and a 350M2 floor plate, so that's not on.

Which is to say, when taken together, I believe this 2 property sets preclude putting up a building on both. The only way to fit 2 towers on this block would be acquire the condo at the corner w/Wellesley.
Click to expand...
At 68 storeys on a min 638 plate, the tiny shears shown illustratively in that zoning set are going to get a whole lot bigger. The loss on GBA to GSA would be just silly.

2, 1m transfer slabs? Sure. No mid-level-mechanical? Cool.
 
ProjectEnd said:
At 68 storeys on a min 638 plate, the tiny shears shown illustratively in that zoning set are going to get a whole lot bigger. The loss on GBA to GSA would be just silly.

2, 1m transfer slabs? Sure. No mid-level-mechanical? Cool.
Click to expand...

This is not the typical zone and flip coalition; any thoughts on why they've structured this in this manner?
 
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


543 Yonge Street - Community Consultation Meeting​


Tuesday, April 9, 2024 6:30 PM - 8:00 PM
(UTC-04:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada)

​

Register for webinar​

If you want to attend, register now. When your registration is approved, you'll receive an invitation to join the webinar.

Agenda​

Community Consultation Meeting for a proposed 68-storey mixed-use building comprised of approximately 40,108 square metres of residential gross floor area with 663 dwelling units and 356 square metres of at grade retail space.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top