Toronto Q Loft | ?m | 8s | Royal Queen | TACT Architecture

C

catcher_of_cats

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 16, 2007
Messages
961
Reaction score
32
Location
Leaving Rob Fordland before it is too late.
Mods, if there is a thread already for this please merge it.

Taken from Councillor Gord Perks email update.

Application: 1205 Queen Street West Development

Posted: 19 Feb 2010 02:35 PM PST

Recently, I arranged a meeting with both the Architect and Developer of 1205 Queen St. West to give members of the community an opportunity to review the proposal for a development at Queen and Dufferin. Since the first community meeting over a year ago, some changes have been made to the application to address some design concerns raised by the Planning department. \ The revised proposal is for an eight storey (65 units) condominium building with roughly the same gross floor area and density as the previous proposal. Most of the units are designed to one or two bedroom, 600 sp ft to 850 sp ft. The architect has proposed that the Queen Street facade will be brick (real or fake) to continue the streetscape and the height of the first podium will match the height of the Parkdale Community Health Centre, to the west, for continuity. At grade, commercial will be steel and glass retail space on both Queen and Dufferin flankage. The entrance for parking is proposed off the laneway (south of Dufferin), the exit for which is proposed onto Gwynne. In the lane at the rear of this property the Milky Way will be widened by 10′ to accommodate access. Once a complete application is received, Planning will circulate to a number of City Divisions for technical review and comment as per requirements of Site Plan.

Here is the PDF from the meeting.
http://www.gordperks.ca/park_post/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/100216_community-mtg-sm.pdf
 
This is a fantastic presentation document. Too often, there are just a couple of sketches and the architect or developer attempt to cover off a lot of their thinking by talking about what they did. But this document clearly outlines their thinking for making it mesh with the existing neighbourhood. Having never seen this before, I totally understand what they did to address the context in which this building will exist.

Plus, I much prefer this design to the previous one in the deck. Much more understated and contemporary. I really like how this area is focusing on low/mid-rise developments with a reasonable number of units.
 
I don't care how nice the plans are, our city is being generationally ghettoized: "Most of the units are designed to one or two bedroom, 600 sp ft to 850 sp ft."
Can you see a family living in a space like this? Not likely....
 
mms said:
I don't care how nice the plans are, our city is being generationally ghettoized: "Most of the units are designed to one or two bedroom, 600 sp ft to 850 sp ft."
Can you see a family living in a space like this? Not likely....
Click to expand...

"ghettoized", what does this have anything to do with one or two bedroom units being built?
 
Very nice, I definitely like the way the contextual elements are illustrated in the presentation.

mms:

That maybe, but please explain to me how this project in particular "ghettoize" the city considering the fact that isn't replacing any existing multi-bedroom residential units? That's on top of the questionable belief that you can't raise a family in a two bedroom unit - which is a self-made fallacy in North America.

AoD
 
Last edited:
A great improvement over the previous scheme and infinitely better than the horrible plaza that's there now. This can't happen soon enough.
 
Most tenants will be of similar age, and most of new condo builds lack 3 or 4 bedroom units.

The size of the units and number of bedrooms is limiting the type of tenant that will consider buying an apartment in this building. It caters mostly to single young professionals or couples, not families with kids.
 
mms said:
Most tenants will be of similar age... The size of the units and number of bedrooms is limiting the type of tenant that will consider buying an apartment in this building.
Click to expand...

Your argument makes this project sound like the suburbs in which entire square kilometers are covered with mostly identically sized, priced, furnished, tenure, and populated housing. In addition, family living in 3+ bedrooms is a very recent phenomenon and one that should die out due to a declining birth rate.
 
Where does Perks stand on the issue of family-sized condos ala Vaughan? Might be push for changes to this project?
 
Two thumbs up. What a phenominal and responsible job they have done with integration of vertical elements, materials and elevations within the existing context. This should significantly improve that intersection if they can get this one approved and sold.

What a significant improvement over their first design. They're like night and day.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
@ catcher: 3 bedroom units are very much alive and well in the rental housing market (ie. older buildings), and with skyrocketing housing market, condos may be the best way to go for many families who would like to own, but stay in the city. However, when was the last time you saw a family being featured in one of the adverts for King or Queen St, or even waterfront condos? The developers are certainly not doing their part in attracting families or seniors into their property. A number of these neighbourhoods don't even have schools, or any other businesses other (save for Hakim Optical or Sketchley Cleaners).

As far as for declining birth rate - Canada and the US have both experienced a slight baby boom since 2007. May not be out of the woods, but these building practices sure are not encouraging people to have kids and continue living an exciting life in the urban city centre.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top