Toronto 7-15 Fraser Avenue | 29.26m | 7s | SvN

All that essentially says is that it allows for the lane to be used as a part of the new street. I'm interested in seeing how they plan to allow access once the new street is implemented. Would this remain a "private access lane", or would the city take ownership with some sort of complicated easement setup to allow the building to overhang the street?
 
No new documents have been posted on the City's Application Information Centre since the project was proposed 16 months ago and it has not been appealed to the OMB. Anyone know if it's still going forward?
 
Notice how all the development is occurring on the east end of the commercial district
 
I'm still a little unsatisfied that they are not connecting the new road to Front Street.
 
maestro said:
Notice how all the development is occurring on the east end of the commercial district
Click to expand...
I have to make clear that this is 'hearsay'....Hopefully not 'heresy'...

Maestro: Yes, at least so far. I'm told that the City *can be* very inflexible to deal with, and that's at least part of the pattern you're seeing. I'm am privy to a certain turn of events, much for the better as to historical...ummm...'respect'. Have to leave it at that for now. I have forwarded @Toronto1834's query to the appropriate persons.
Automation Gallery said:
Yeah true, get that new proposed road/pedestrian walkway on the southern portion to Dufferin built and see how quick development will snowball westward
Click to expand...
I have to be careful relating what I know on this, so to answer this indirectly, and as a direct response to my queries on this, the short answer is (gist) "We're still waiting for the City to make an offer". They can only wait so long, and then plow ahead on other plans, some with other developers involved.

Avenue said:
I'm still a little unsatisfied that they are not connecting the new road to Front Street.
Click to expand...
Yeahhh...How to answer this without spoiling things...? (gist) That was the plan. I will try and relay essentially verbatim, that *the City* has been a huge part of not stepping up to the plate on this. There are some rankled sensitivities in that the City expects to make demands when it deems apt, and wait for developers to change their long-term detailed plans to suit that at whim. Reality doesn't work that way.

On the other hand, in all due respect to City Planning...they get treated same from City Hall and Council.

Got to leave it there, will forward this to see if a more 'authorized' answer can be had. I am impressed with the latest changes being considered...
 
The Front Street Extension rightly died years ago. I'm not sure why we're lamenting the city not constructing an expensive, above-grade thoroughfare? Especially when there's a large park (Ordinance Triangle) and both north-south and east-west pedestrian / bike paths through Garrison Point and south of Novus, connecting Liberty Village with Fort York and beyond. I would endorse an east-west extension of that network (to Front Street, south of 28 Bathurst) but certainly not a bridge large enough for automobile traffic.
 
^ A point of clarity: When "Front Street" was referred to by myself above in answer to @Avenue , I was thinking of what is being referred to as "New Street", and it wasn't to connect all the way to Front, that was another project since abandoned by the City, but "New Street" was, IIRC, to run through to Strachan or thereabouts. It's displayed on the Google Map without a name:
https://www.google.ca/maps/place/To...23555502ab4c477!8m2!3d43.653226!4d-79.3831843

What I can add is that "15 Fraser" (the street numbers are ambiguous, historically for records, and even for the Post Office) is now being restored to one of its iterations over the years. An actual complete restoration, even in likeness, is not that simple, as evidence now indicates it was a structure of glass windows, the panels later bricked in, and later the second floor added. I'll wait for authorized reference before adding more detail on that, but one of the features that I find stunning, the rail spur corridor into and inside the building, with a clerestory roof above it, is also being restored as a pedestrian colonnade. I'd love to comment further, but must make sure I have facts exactly right. The original boiler, a wonderful piece of engineering, is also being restored. An 'authorized' answer is imminent within a day or so on at least some aspects queried here. The building was a 'model factory' in its day, a showcase of sorts.
 
Last edited:
ProjectEnd said:
The Front Street Extension rightly died years ago. I'm not sure why we're lamenting the city not constructing an expensive, above-grade thoroughfare? Especially when there's a large park (Ordinance Triangle) and both north-south and east-west pedestrian / bike paths through Garrison Point and south of Novus, connecting Liberty Village with Fort York and beyond. I would endorse an east-west extension of that network (to Front Street, south of 28 Bathurst) but certainly not a bridge large enough for automobile traffic.
Click to expand...

I remember Mike Layton saying something similarly Post-Jane Jacobsesqe. I don't think there's anything 'rightly' about its death - the subject should be up to debate. The connection would have been above-grade only for a short period and there wasn't much of anything where it would need to be elevated. I'm not a fan of above-grade thoroughfares either and specifically dislike how Richmond and Adelaide end up in the east side, but in this case it would make sense. Like, how is no connection is better than a briefly above-grade connection?

If Front was extended to Strachan where the 'New Street' would begin to the West, and you could have had a bus route from Dufferin loop to Union Station to serve the intensely heavy Liberty Village ridership, which the King Pilot couldn't really relieve.
 
The big thing the Front Street extension would have served is access to the Gardiner - which due it its outmoded interchange designs is unnecessarily difficult, resulting in those famous hour long traffic jams just getting onto the highway (took me 40 mins to go from Queen to the Gardiner on Jarvis on Good Friday..).

It was a solution to a real problem, it just had a lot of very poor externalities. In reality there is probably a better way to handle it via reconfigured Gardiner ramps and additional rail corridor underpasses such as Church Street, which is essentially what the city has landed on today.
 
I liked the theory behind the Front Street extension but not the cost of it.

I hope the city is exploring a local street extension on the north side of the rail corridor connecting with Strachan north of Ordinance while space is still available. The TTC can run a bus route from Dufferin Loop through Liberty Village connecting to the extension. Like the Sudbury extension in the Queen West triangle.
 
maestro said:
I hope the city is exploring a local street extension on the north side of the rail corridor connecting with Strachan north of Ordinance while space is still available.
Click to expand...
The developer(s) themselves are taking the initiative for a public access way along there with signage and 'wayfaring' to offer better access to the properties involved. It's my understanding that without the City's involvement or purchase, it won't be vehicular public access, just pedestrian and bicycle. That aspect was outsourced to a company that specializes in maps, wayfaring, and public communications. Things are moving slowly on these developments, and apparently with a different tack from what was originally envisaged, but from what I can gather (and I do promise to add more verified facts shortly to what's already posted) it's changing for the better in terms of celebrating and re-using the structures in a way respectful of the past. The owners are very aware of the historical value of some of them, and how restoring facets is not only good practice in terms of heritage, but also in being attractive for the public.

The tenancy for 7 Fraser (collective to the entire building, sub-let to individuals) expires this year. Work will commence on that premise once it's available. Again, from what I gathered querying on it prior, the front part of the building at least is to be refurbished and re-used. It's in good shape structurally, and excellent potential for re-use.
 
Last edited:
Slight change of course here. Now in for C of A for a restaurant space:
1. Section 12(2)(298). By-Law 438-86

'No person shall, within the Liberty Area, in an IC district, other than on a lot fronting onto King Street West or Dufferin Street, or the properties known municipally in 1995 as 105 to 141 Jefferson Street inclusive and 110 to 134 Atlantic Avenue inclusive, use land, or erect or use a building or structure for any use listed in Section 9(1)(f)(b)(iv) of this by-law under the heading "RETAIL AND SERVICE SHOPS".'

Restaurant use is listed under Section 9(1)(f)(b)(iv) and therefore we require relief from the above restriction.

As described in this application, a portion of 7 Fraser avenue having a total area of 143 m2 is proposed to be used as a restaurant.
Click to expand...

viewSupportingDoc (8) Page 001.jpg


viewSupportingDoc (8) Page 002.jpg


viewSupportingDoc (8) Page 003.jpg
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top