Toronto Plaza on Yonge | 108.7m | 32s | Plaza | BDP Quadrangle
- Thread starter Automation Gallery
- Start date
DonValleyRainbow
Senior Member
Member Bio
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2014
- Messages
- 2,867
- Reaction score
- 1,927
- Location
- Kay Gardner Beltline Trail
https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onomb/doc/2017/2017canlii53023/2017canlii53023.html
Yolanda Flanders Development Limited was granted party status, and is participating in mediation. Yolanda owns 51 Drewry Ave and 8-28 Inez Court.
Yolanda Flanders Development Limited was granted party status, and is participating in mediation. Yolanda owns 51 Drewry Ave and 8-28 Inez Court.
sunnyraytoronto
Senior Member
Yolanda Flanders Development Limited is "part" of Conservatory Group which is supposed to be doing Ruby Condo along Inez Court (directly west of this development),..... and PearlPlace on Yonge,..... Conservatory Group march to the beat of a different drummer (VS other developers) and apparently have lots of cash on hand
See page 4:
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2013/ex/comm/communicationfile-39052.pdf
sunnyraytoronto
Senior Member
Yolanda Flanders Development Limited (ie: part of Conservatory Group) was a party at OMB pre-hearing/mediation/hearing for this development to ensure proper setback so it doesn't block their Ruby Condo development/proposal directly west of this site.
Last edited:
PMT
Senior Member
Attachments
sunnyraytoronto
Senior Member
Looking at the new site plan in PMT's previous post,... all I can say is WOW!
Actually,... WOW, WOW, WOW!!!
- First WOW, for the "Potential Easement For Pedestrian Link" running along entire south end of property.
- Second WOW, for "Potential Parkland Dedication" on Yonge Street! Very rare to get on-site parkland dedication on Yonge Street since the land is much more expensive and desirable for high density development (developer more than happy to convey similar valuation of land outside NorthYorkCentreSecondaryPlan area where they can't build high density!). How rare? Last time NorthYorkCentre got on-site parkland dedication on Yonge Street was for tiny OliveSquarePark,... note: GibsonSquare RoseGarden Park on Yonge is technically PrivatelyOwnedPublicSpace (community wanted to save RoseGarden & apple tree) but it's a park in back.
- Third WOW, for "Potential POP" (PrivatelyOwnedPublicSpace) beside "Potential Easement For Pedestrian Link" running the remaining southern length not taken by "Potential Parkland Dedication".
Why is all this so jaw-dropping? CityPlanning is supposed to negotiate these for the benefit of the local community (Section37 CommunityBenefit & Parkland dedication) but here, they're all primarily for the benefit of the property directly west of this site,.... which is Yolanda Flanders Development Ltd (part of Conservatory Group) Ruby Condo proposal,.. which is 100m off Yonge Street but now gets a nice direct connection to Yonge Street lined with Park and PrivatelyOwnedOpenSpace - that another developer has to pay for!!!,.... which really confirms just how much Yolanda Flanders really have the nearby developers, CityPlanning, local Councillor all by the balls!!! Yolanda Flanders control the fate of the required Beecroft Road extension north of Finch to Drewry/Cummer since the City requires YolandaFlanders/ConservatoryGroup to convey some of their land (via Ruby Condo development) for the Beecroft Road extension north.
http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/thread...ervatory-23s-e-i-richmond.11339/#post-1267682
http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/thread...s-kirkor-architects.15020/page-4#post-1255317
Here's the original site plan for this development application (compare it to new site plan in PMT's previous post),... not only was there no "Potential Easement For Pedestrian Link", nor "Potential Parkland Dedication", nor "Potential POP",... but since new Potential on-site Parkland Dedication goes to the southeast corner, the original car dealership has to move to the northeast corner (along Yonge Street),... the original 29-storey condo tower along northern end that originally ran east-west (matching the neighbouring east-west running apartment towers directly north) now gets turn around further away from Yonge Street towards the west side of lot and now runs north-south.
New Site Plan:
Needless to say,... I've never seen an initial site plan in North York Centre get so many drastic changes before approval/OMB,.... this just show how much YolandaFlanders/ConservatoryGroup has everyone (including other nearby developer, CityPlanning and local Councillor) by the balls!,.... and now we see how very effective YolandaFlanders/ConservatoryGroup is at squeezing hard!
Attachments
Last edited:
It makes sense to provide connections, where possible, to Yonge Street, if there's gong to be high-density development off of it. Mid-block connections promote walking, and in car-dominated North York, that's an improvement.
42
42
sunnyraytoronto
Senior Member
There's supposed to be a real east-west road connector 100m south via Newtonbrook Plaza redevelopment.
http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/thread...ervatory-23s-e-i-richmond.11339/#post-1267682
On this site, since easement for pedestrian link, park and POPS are along south side of property, residents are encouraged to head south on Yonge,... to Finch Subway station - thus, promoting transit. Note: diagonal crossing (northwest to southeast) of proposed Park is beneficial for residents of this site; but the east-west pedestrian linkage won't be since it runs adjacent to the rear of the townhouse at southern base here.
The City relies on a general formula and negotiation skill of local Councillor to determine amount of Developer Contribution (Section37 CommunityBenefit, Section42 Parks & Section45 (Community improvements), etc,...).
https://www1.toronto.ca/wps/portal/...nnel=830adada600f0410VgnVCM10000071d60f89RCRD
Technically, Section37 CommunityBenefit can only be spent within the Ward where that development occurs,.... ideally within 1km of the development to offset the negative impacts of this development to the existing locals most affected.
A Developer will never contribute anything extra than they're required since the extra cost will come out of their profit.
Thus, when this development has so much Developer Contribution centered around a nice 100m east-west pedestrian linkage with Park and POPS (PrivatelyOwnedPublicSpace),... that's done at the opportunity cost of other possible improvements to the existing local community,... such as non-profit childcare facility, new playground at local school, community centre improvement, public realm improvement, public art, cycling infrastructure, etc,... that would likely be more beneficial to the existing local communities and thus, serve the real objectives of these Developer Contributions.
The main beneficiary of this 100m east-west pedestrian linkage lined with Park and POPS is ConservatoryGroup's Ruby site directly west,... in the latest unsigned settlement proposal for Ruby (image in link below) there's no easement at Ruby site for connecting pedestrian linkage, so technically on their side of the property line, they can put in locked gate to restrict non-residents and limit their liability.
http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/thread...ry-23s-e-i-richmond.11339/page-2#post-1277662
@PMT, the above link shows why this one likely got bumped up to 32-storey (within 100m residential + mechanical)
Last edited:
Enough with the bolding. Please act like others on this site and converse normally in a way that does not make it seem like you are shouting.
In regards to the Ruby site, if the City is asking for an easement for a pedestrian link here, they probably are at the Ruby site as well. As there's to be a park across Beecroft from the Ruby site, why not make that accessible to people on Yonge, the way that Yonge is being made accessible to those on Beecroft (and further west). Pedestrian links are good.
42
In regards to the Ruby site, if the City is asking for an easement for a pedestrian link here, they probably are at the Ruby site as well. As there's to be a park across Beecroft from the Ruby site, why not make that accessible to people on Yonge, the way that Yonge is being made accessible to those on Beecroft (and further west). Pedestrian links are good.
42
sunnyraytoronto
Senior Member
I'm in total agreement pedestrian links are good as well as safe cycling infrastructure.
In North York, CityPlanning has relatively new objective of getting more parkland and POPS right on prime Yonge Street land,... it's rare, so I'm surprised they actually got it here. Generally, in NorthYorkCentre most of the parkland dedication goes on west-side of Beecroft (like Ruby proposal) or eastside of Doris (onto land not available for high density development). (west side of Beecroft from ParkHomes/Empress to Finch is basically all open green space & parkland from Developer Contribution)
There's already an unsigned settlement proposal with Ruby so their Developer Contribution is basically maxed out already,.... unless, YolandaFlanders/ConservatoryGroup manage to expand the boundary of the 100m height limit on their property,... their 32-storey 100m SouthTower is within that limit but their 11-storey NorthTower isn't,... then that would demand more Developer Contribution for items like pedestrian linkage or whatever,... but if we get to that stage,... those then become issues that the existing local community would have say in as well,....
In North York, CityPlanning has relatively new objective of getting more parkland and POPS right on prime Yonge Street land,... it's rare, so I'm surprised they actually got it here. Generally, in NorthYorkCentre most of the parkland dedication goes on west-side of Beecroft (like Ruby proposal) or eastside of Doris (onto land not available for high density development). (west side of Beecroft from ParkHomes/Empress to Finch is basically all open green space & parkland from Developer Contribution)
There's already an unsigned settlement proposal with Ruby so their Developer Contribution is basically maxed out already,.... unless, YolandaFlanders/ConservatoryGroup manage to expand the boundary of the 100m height limit on their property,... their 32-storey 100m SouthTower is within that limit but their 11-storey NorthTower isn't,... then that would demand more Developer Contribution for items like pedestrian linkage or whatever,... but if we get to that stage,... those then become issues that the existing local community would have say in as well,....
Update.
@PMT's post above provided the new Oct 31 plan following OMB-leed mediation in September. Further updates were submitted to the City in December, but they were quite minor and had more to do with alterations to the driveway and ramps. There are 3 fewer parking spaces proposed for the building: that's pretty much it for changes to the plan of any note.
On OMB hearing was held, it would seem, on January 22. The OMB page does not state whether it was a short settlement hearing or not, but typically that's what follows mediation. In any case, no result has been posted yet.
42
@PMT's post above provided the new Oct 31 plan following OMB-leed mediation in September. Further updates were submitted to the City in December, but they were quite minor and had more to do with alterations to the driveway and ramps. There are 3 fewer parking spaces proposed for the building: that's pretty much it for changes to the plan of any note.
On OMB hearing was held, it would seem, on January 22. The OMB page does not state whether it was a short settlement hearing or not, but typically that's what follows mediation. In any case, no result has been posted yet.
42
Last edited:
Marcanadian
Moderator
Looks like this is going through.
LPAT decision:
https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onlpat/doc/2018/2018canlii67711/2018canlii67711.html
LPAT decision:
https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onlpat/doc/2018/2018canlii67711/2018canlii67711.html
Automation Gallery
Superstar
5840 YONGE ST
Ward 18 - North York District
32 storey residential building containing 408 dwelling units and three levels of underground parking.
Ward 18 - North York District
32 storey residential building containing 408 dwelling units and three levels of underground parking.
Proposed Use ---# of Storeys ---# of Units ---
TypeNumberDate SubmittedStatus Applications:
Site Plan Approval19 108243 NNY 18 SAJan 24, 2019Application Received
PMT
Senior Member
Marcanadian
Moderator
Application Information Centre
Search for details about current planning applications and Minor variance and Consent applications. Application Information Centre For best results, please use the latest version of Microsoft IE/Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. The Application Information Centre allows you to: Search by...
app.toronto.ca