Toronto O2 Toronto | 48.16m | 14s | Identity | P + S / IBI
- Thread starter BMyers
- Start date
ksun
Senior Member
Do me a favour and walk around the area this Sunday (it will be warmer). There are many surface lots - no less than 20-30 within a very small area.
https://goo.gl/maps/11WtI
https://goo.gl/maps/6etkj
https://goo.gl/maps/nFXb4
https://goo.gl/maps/qIIMT
https://goo.gl/maps/9TleA
https://goo.gl/maps/yG0Eu
https://goo.gl/maps/NY9aD
https://goo.gl/maps/nbAa9
https://goo.gl/maps/9dBGK
https://goo.gl/maps/8ikL7
agoraflaneur
Active Member
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't most of the parking lots part of the Moss Park tower complex (or the Armoury)? And in order to develop them the complex would have to undergo a Regent Park treatment?
There certainly are a lot of them. The Shuter Street presence is horrible - a parking lot continuously stretching from Sherbourne to Parliament. And Parliament from Shuter to Queen. Then there are lots almost the whole distance between Queen and Shuter on Seaton. It is a terrible complex that really drains energy from what should be an extremely vibrant area (and already is to some extent).
I wish more of the lots were privately held - I am sure development would occur if that were the case. Still, it represents an opportunity for the city - a lot more density could be supported by that parcel. Perhaps once the last phases of Regent Park are wrapping up this will come on the agenda? Does anyone have any information as to the state of repair at this complex and whether replacement is justified on that score.
There certainly are a lot of them. The Shuter Street presence is horrible - a parking lot continuously stretching from Sherbourne to Parliament. And Parliament from Shuter to Queen. Then there are lots almost the whole distance between Queen and Shuter on Seaton. It is a terrible complex that really drains energy from what should be an extremely vibrant area (and already is to some extent).
I wish more of the lots were privately held - I am sure development would occur if that were the case. Still, it represents an opportunity for the city - a lot more density could be supported by that parcel. Perhaps once the last phases of Regent Park are wrapping up this will come on the agenda? Does anyone have any information as to the state of repair at this complex and whether replacement is justified on that score.
Last edited:
someMidTowner
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
The third link is part of the armoury.
The 4th is the project this thread is dedicated to, therefore, not an empty lot.
A few others on your list are service centers, which pretty much always require costly soil remediation.
cdr108
Senior Member
that's not an issue for developers if they can build 25+s and sell the units proposed.
I have to agree with ksun - either developers, buyers (at least not at current prices) or both are avoiding those areas.
many of the apartments in the park complexes could increase their densities given the amount of land they occupy.
ChesterCopperpot
Senior Member
So - regarding those 10 examples ksun posted
1 - ok - I'll give you this one, suitable lot to work on
2 - north side of Dundas - not in Moss Park by ksun's definition
3 - not a lot - it's the Armoury land - as mentioned above
4 - part of this development - as mentioned above
5 - west of Jarvis - not in Moss Park
6 - south of Queen - not in Moss Park
7 - south of Queen - not in Moss Park - and not a parking lot
8 - south of Queen - not in Moss Park - and not a parking lot
9 - south of Queen - not in Moss Park
10 - that's the parking for the TCHC buildings
1 - ok - I'll give you this one, suitable lot to work on
2 - north side of Dundas - not in Moss Park by ksun's definition
3 - not a lot - it's the Armoury land - as mentioned above
4 - part of this development - as mentioned above
5 - west of Jarvis - not in Moss Park
6 - south of Queen - not in Moss Park
7 - south of Queen - not in Moss Park - and not a parking lot
8 - south of Queen - not in Moss Park - and not a parking lot
9 - south of Queen - not in Moss Park
10 - that's the parking for the TCHC buildings
Redevelopment occurs in stages. In areas like this, initial redevelopment, or gentrification on a smaller scale, acts as a catalyst that will pave the way for more of the same in the future. Things are coming along in the surroundings with no indication that there's any problem with its uptake. Over time no doubt all under-utilized land here will find that it will be the target of intensification. There are a lot of projects on its periphery currently being redeveloped, projects at every stage, and Toronto has an immense amount of land ready when for intensification when the market is ready for it.
Remember the Fords' blustery demand when they backed down from their monorail, mall, and ferris wheel dreams for the Port Lands, that the process of redeveloping that area be sped up? Well, Waterfront Toronto did accelerate the planning process for that area to what extent they could, but the truth is that there is as much land in the Port Lands waiting to be redeveloped as there is in all of our existing Downtown. That's huge. And there are scads of properties here and there in all areas of this city also crying out for redevelopment attention. Bit by bit, redevelopment will happen here, there, and Moss Park. It just has to do with our capacity to build it and absorb the new units. Patience will be rewarded.
42
Riverdale Rink Rat
Senior Member
Member Bio
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2008
- Messages
- 2,775
- Reaction score
- 273
- Location
- Back to East York... Alas!
+1. Given the east side absorption rates are going to have to spike just to accommodate all the Canary condos and the rest of WDL, as well as the rest of Regent Park, this little chunk will be a long time coming.
FWIW, I'd avoid this particular square of downtown as well, if I was a developer. Dundas/Sherbourne down to Queen/Sherbourne is a tough street. I spent too many years at Moss Park rink and the pool next door (as well as walking the soccer/baseball field to clear off the needles before spring rugby practice) to have hope it'll gentrify any more than it already has (although GBC and the condo N. of Richmond have started to encroach already).
maestro
Senior Member
Well said however, 4 is not this development. It does have an older application for a hotel.
ChesterCopperpot
Senior Member
you are indeed correct
http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/showth...nn-203-Jarvis-NE-corner-Shuter-Manga-20s-P-S)
http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/showth...nn-203-Jarvis-NE-corner-Shuter-Manga-20s-P-S)
cdr108
Senior Member
I understand and agree with you.
my point was that developers are going further east than sherbourne to other areas than build in the Moss Park corridor.
an example is the SW corner of Dundas/Sherbourne with the strip plaza and adjoining 2 properties south (boarded up Victorian and empty lot) would be developable; as are Filmores and adjoining parking lot; and the one across the street.
now that Pace is under construction and Dundas Square condos still in sales, will these projects spur redevelopment in this area?
Yes, certainly they will. What I'm trying to saying though is that as there is so much land available for redevelopment east of Downtown, that it is impossible to know just when any particular site will go into play next. It will happen, but to do it all will take a long time.
42
42
maestro
Senior Member
Dundas and Sherbourne is the apex of shadiness in the east end of downtown. it would be a near impossible sell to locals but, who needs locals to buy.
ksun
Senior Member
not necessarily. Pace is a 3 minutes walk from that intersection and it was selling fine. It may be a shady area but it is still within easy walking distance to Yonge/Dundas, with all the shops and facilities nearby. I would rather live at Dundas/Sherbourne than Bayview/York Mills or anywhere in Vaughan.
Plus, is it that horrible? https://goo.gl/maps/IVeIT
Show it to anyone and I doubt they will say "wow, that's a terrible place to live!" It is nicer than many areas in NYC or Los Angeles.
I hope the SE and NW corners will be knocked down and developed. There is a big lot south of the SE corner, wonder who it belongs to.
