MatrixElement
Active Member
^^^ Very nice!
Toronto M5V Condominiums | 118.87m | 35s | Lifetime | Core Architects
Therion
Senior Member
Practically at grade already. In a couple of weeks the podium will start rising.
TOBoy
Active Member
Dropped into their sales office yesterday afternoon. Didn't realize how effing expensive their units are. Decent ones cost more than $570/sf. Finishes are upper-middle class. Many units on the south have challenging views though, blocked by the SOHO hotel and some 12-storey building. Further south of course, the Cityplace buildings will block some portion of their views as well.
Word was they were 85% sold, but now 77% because they split some larger units into smaller ones. And parking is only available for purchase for units > 700sf...for $40K!!
Word was they were 85% sold, but now 77% because they split some larger units into smaller ones. And parking is only available for purchase for units > 700sf...for $40K!!
Ania
New Member
Important to all m5v owners
City Council is going to vote on rezoning application for 56 Blue Jays Way on September 15.
The City Planning Division recommended refusal of this application on several grounds. To put it briefly, the proposed building is 42 storey, has excessive massing, and violates all setback requirements. The proposed distance from M5V is about 6m across the back lane! SE views from M5V will be essentially blocked, and the laneway shared by Soho, M5V and the new development will be significantly congested.
Note that this is NOT the previous design of quite attractive, 20-storey building that had acceptable height, massing and setbacks. The land was sold and this is new proposal for quite different, massive building. The scaled down version proposed by the City was apparently rejected by the developer.
This report has all the details, including 3D view of the quadrant showing M5V and the new building. See how it affects M5V.
www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2009/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-21938.pdf
While one can hardly expect no tall buildigs in the neighbourhood (there are application for rezoning of 99 Blue Jays Way and 355 King West for 40 storey buildings), the 56 Blue Jays Way is a different story. The massing is incompatible with majority of built and approved buildings, and directly affects M5V sunlight and privacy.
If anybody wants to speak up for M5V, here is the number to the City Clerk: 416 392 7033 (you need to call in order to register to speak, and get room details etc).
Also note that M5V itself is a part of the problem. The building was rejected by the City, but later approved by OMB without proper setback. At that time, OMB ruled that it would be unfair to reject the building on the basis of too close proximity to the future development. However, it clearly said that future development should be evaluated on it's own merits and in relation to the existing buildings.
You can find the details in the OMB decision:
www.omb.gov.on.ca/english/eDecisions/eDecisions.html; enter
PL060524 into the search box.
City Council is going to vote on rezoning application for 56 Blue Jays Way on September 15.
The City Planning Division recommended refusal of this application on several grounds. To put it briefly, the proposed building is 42 storey, has excessive massing, and violates all setback requirements. The proposed distance from M5V is about 6m across the back lane! SE views from M5V will be essentially blocked, and the laneway shared by Soho, M5V and the new development will be significantly congested.
Note that this is NOT the previous design of quite attractive, 20-storey building that had acceptable height, massing and setbacks. The land was sold and this is new proposal for quite different, massive building. The scaled down version proposed by the City was apparently rejected by the developer.
This report has all the details, including 3D view of the quadrant showing M5V and the new building. See how it affects M5V.
www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2009/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-21938.pdf
While one can hardly expect no tall buildigs in the neighbourhood (there are application for rezoning of 99 Blue Jays Way and 355 King West for 40 storey buildings), the 56 Blue Jays Way is a different story. The massing is incompatible with majority of built and approved buildings, and directly affects M5V sunlight and privacy.
If anybody wants to speak up for M5V, here is the number to the City Clerk: 416 392 7033 (you need to call in order to register to speak, and get room details etc).
Also note that M5V itself is a part of the problem. The building was rejected by the City, but later approved by OMB without proper setback. At that time, OMB ruled that it would be unfair to reject the building on the basis of too close proximity to the future development. However, it clearly said that future development should be evaluated on it's own merits and in relation to the existing buildings.
You can find the details in the OMB decision:
www.omb.gov.on.ca/english/eDecisions/eDecisions.html; enter
PL060524 into the search box.
whatever
Senior Member
Oh, so it was ok for your building to contravene the city's planning guidelines, but now that your future neighbour wants to go to the OMB you're speaking up? That's total hypocrisy, and you should be ashamed of yourself.
Ramako
Moderator
This. The balls on some of these people blow me away.
Ania
New Member
You misunderstood.
It is not OK for ANY building to contravene any code, that's why I said M5V was a problem.
If somebody speak up louder before MV5 was approved, a bad precent would not have been set, and maybe there would be no problem today.
Compounding one bad planning decision with another does not benefit anybody, neither the existing or future resident.
And by the way it is not MY building.
It is not OK for ANY building to contravene any code, that's why I said M5V was a problem.
If somebody speak up louder before MV5 was approved, a bad precent would not have been set, and maybe there would be no problem today.
Compounding one bad planning decision with another does not benefit anybody, neither the existing or future resident.
And by the way it is not MY building.
grey
Senior Member
That information has already been known for around a year now (it appears earlier in this thread).
We're generally not fans of the OMB overruling the official city plan, but I really doubt that anything can be done at this point. This development has already set a precedent for Charlie across the street, which has similar massing.
We're generally not fans of the OMB overruling the official city plan, but I really doubt that anything can be done at this point. This development has already set a precedent for Charlie across the street, which has similar massing.
Nebakenezer
Active Member
Let them build the darn thing. Look how close rbc, ritz, and simcoe place are. Then look at trump and scotia building.
Toronto should be a tall dense city.
Toronto should be a tall dense city.
SP!RE
°°°°°°
No logic to what you just said.
A city can be dense without plenty of height in every area. In the Financial District, yes, build like crazy, but in other downtown neighbourhoods there should be strict guidelines.
I haven't seen shadow impact studies, etc., so I can't speak one way or the other on 56 BJW or M5V, but your logic of "Well we did it here, so why not do it over here?" makes no sense.
Torontovibe
Senior Member
It's downtown, so what's the problem? You have Lightbox, The Ritz and RBC right in the neighbourhood, with 300 Front coming soon, so what's the big deal? (Not to mention Cityplace) I don't know why you're making a big deal of it. And you're using diminished views to M5V residents, to get them all fired up. If they chose to move in this very URBAN neighbourhood, they should be expecting tall buildings on all sides. That just comes along with living downtown, in Canada's largest city. (and one of it's fastest growing neighbourhoods) The sky is not falling, Chicken Little!
drum118
Superstar
Ania
New Member
Perhaps we are refering to two different versions for 56 BJW? The previous one approved by the City was quite neat.
I came across these reports when considering buing into M5V. The final report was issued June 3, 2009, and the council is to vote next week, so these are not last year news. I posted it on this thread because i thought it might be interesting for M5V-ers.
The approval process is quite thorough, and all factors are considered: land use, height, massing, shadows, winds, traffic impact, streetscape etc. Community input was encouraged and considered (SoHo residents contributed).
khris
Senior Member
Great photos drum118! This one seems to be moving along nicely.
Last edited: