90 Niagara | ?m | 5s | Fieldgate | Giannone Petricone

waterloowarrior

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
1,766
Reaction score
45
Location
Ottawa
here's some details on the variances being asked for
This development at 90 Niagara has 13 infractions against bylaw 438-86

They are :

1. HEIGHT: proposed height will be 6.7 meters over the maximum allowed
Proposed 18.7m Bylaw 12m

2. HEIGHT AT STREET FRONT proposed 1.225m over maximum allowed and violates the 44 degree angular plane from front to rear of building
Proposed 10.225 Bylaw 9m

3. REARYARD SETBACK : proposed setback 7.2 meters under minimum allowed
Proposed 0.30m Bylaw 7.5m

4. MAXIMUM DEPTH OF BUILDING: proposed depth 13.6 over maximum allowed
Proposed 30.60m Bylaw 17.0m

5. SIDE LOT SETBACK : East proposed .21m under minimum allowed

6. West proposed .32 under minimum allowed
Proposed East 0.39m West 0.28m Bylaw 0.6m

7. FRONT SETBACK : proposed 0.4m under minimum
Proposed 0.6m Bylaw 1.0m

8. RESIDENTAIL GROSS FLOOR AREA : proposed area 1.18 times or (1745.9mSQ) over
Proposed 3966.5mSQ Bylaw 2220.60mSQ

9. TOTAL PARKING proposed 18 parking spaces under minimum
Proposed Residential 28 Bylaw 39
Proposed Visitor 5 Bylaw 12

10. SOFT LANDSCAPING FRONT AND SIDE : proposed 45% under minimum
Proposed 35% Bylaw 80%

11. SOFT LANDSCAPING OF LOT : Proposed 9% under minimum
Proposed 6% (89mSQ) Bylaw 15% (222mSQ)

12. RESIDENTIAL AMENITY SPACE Proposed indoor 31.2mSQ under minimum
Proposed outdoor 51.2mSQ under minimum
Proposed indoor 58.8mSQ outdoor 38.8mSQ Bylaw indoor 90mSQ outdoor 90mSQ

13. LANDSCAPED OPEN SPACE Proposed 13% (192.12mSQ) under minimum
Proposed 17% (252mSQ) Bylaw 30% (444.12mSQ)

http://www.nnnow.ca/issues/
 

rad design

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
hum..

not so much as an infill as a spillover, then.
too bad they didn't reference the tidy harmony of the new townhouses to the east,
which would have provided a smoother, more harmonious segue into the traditional neighbourhood.
I think that's why the bylaw was drafted in the first place, surely?
 

cassius

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
683
Reaction score
0
I imagine this one will clear no problem. "6.7 meters over the maximum allowed"... I can spit farther.

It's kind of difficult to tell what this is really going to look like by the elevations. Certainly it'll be better and more "open" than the garbage that's there now.
 

rad design

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Ha, ha!
You do sound like the chap that could expectorate quite far.
But suggest you do it outside the niagara neighbourhood.
I remember it well.
Nice people there. Nice friendly community. What about them?
What about things the relationship to neighbouring residences, what about the
condo conformity versus the individuality that makes this neighbourhood a litlte charmer.
This intended plan doesn't seem to consider anything other than squeezing out maximum density
from the site and establishing a precedent to further hack away at this little community.
 

gristle

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
2,314
Reaction score
4
This intended plan doesn't seem to consider anything other than squeezing out maximum density
from the site and establishing a precedent to further hack away at this little community.
Sounds like the block bounded by King, John, Mercer and Blue Jays Way. Now that's squeezing out the maximum density.
 

neuhaus

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
1,401
Reaction score
431
Location
Toronto
Sounds like the block bounded by King, John, Mercer and Blue Jays Way. Now that's squeezing out the maximum density.
no, this project is located on the quiet side of King West: west of Bathurst, across the street from the coffin factory lofts.
Interesting building -- it's looks like a hybrid of one condo level pancaked between two townhouse levels.
 

Lenser

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
2,573
Reaction score
2,058
Location
Leslieville
Kind of funny, that expression. Not like it's going to say "Rural condos for urban living." Spectacularly empty slogan! Hope the place is finessed with more imagination than the marketing.
 

RiverCity1

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 15, 2012
Messages
918
Reaction score
0
Haha, well you could look at it as Fieldgate's way of saying that they are building a condo...in Toronto...I believe their first one. They built townhouses recently called Corktown Mews, their first project downtown, but otherwise they build primarily in the suburbs (Brampton, Mississauga, Milton, Markham, etc.) They are decent with quality, so I'm expecting something very good here. It would be kind of cool to face the Coffin Factory lofts :cool:
 

interchange42

Administrator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
22,652
Reaction score
17,895
Location
by the Humber
They are involved with Greenpark Homes at Axiom on Adelaide St E, but I suppose this is their first going it alone. Mean they have a development application in on St. Clair West in joint venture with Madison Homes.

42
 

neuhaus

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
1,401
Reaction score
431
Location
Toronto
It would be kind of cool to face the Coffin Factory lofts :cool:
Maybe not, that property is being redeveloped with two towers added reaching 15 and 19 stories each. Luckily the existing 4-5 storey brick heritage buildings (The Coffin Factory) along Niagara will be retained which commercial and live/work lofts are being proposed on the ground floor.
 

Top