Toronto 95 St Joseph | 134.7m | 40s | Daniels | Core Architects

should also note that this is now a rental - not condos

The senior lifestyle units are rentals but the residential units above remain contemplated as condominium tenure, as per the April 24 architectural documents:
1715199112014.png
 
Project data sheet suggests otherwise

Rental.jpg
 
I have contacted the planner on file to confirm, but in general we prioritize information from architectural plans over the project data sheet, which can be prone to human error.
 
I have contacted the planner on file to confirm, but in general we prioritize information from architectural plans over the project data sheet, which can be prone to human error.

Reply:
The tenure has not been confirmed. The applicant has discussed potential for condo and rental tenure in the building through the process, but has not yet confirmed either way.

As such, the tenure has been listed as 'Unspecified' in the database.
 
New Docs here in support of the changes noted above:


@Paclo

No change in height/unit totals that I can discern from the changes noted above.

From the Planning Addendum (Cover Letter) :

1722246380735.png

1722246426402.png

1722246459343.png

1722246480490.png
 
As a person who's been instead Lanterra's nearby "The Britt" building, I agree that will very likely be the case!
 

The proponent has resubmitted the SPA in advance of the CoA hearing.

Updates since the Minor Variance include a minor increase in residential suites from 444 to 446 and an increase in bike parking from 445 to 447.

CoA hearing is still set for Oct 16
 
Good letter, if i do say so, myself. Any word on the outcome of the 16th?

Approved.

Two minor'ish conditions, one from ECS and one from Heritage (to see drawings before building permits are issued) .

The C of A hearing for this matter is linked below:


Should be at the correct time with any luck.
 

Back
Top