Toronto The Selby | 165.5m | 50s | Tricon | bKL Architecture

dt_toronto_geek said:
There was no option for the beautification of the centre lane, the project was focused on the pedestrian realm by widening and improving sidewalk conditions, improving the Jarvis/Charles/Mt. Pleasant intersection, planting of trees and gardens, sidewalk furniture, improved light fixtures, grand entrance to Allen Gardens off Jarvis, way-finding signage/historic bronze sidewalk inlays etc. I would have taken a beautified destination street over bike lanes, and certainly over what Ford & Co. gave back.
Click to expand...


sorry, you are correct - i don't know why but i thought i read there was a centre-lane proposal - my mistake.
 
Every time I see this thread bolded on the list, I think of Lanterra's North St. Jamestown development. Does anyone know if there is any traction with that one?
 
still in the rezoning process I think. lanterra is in absolutely no rush with that one, its been over 3 years since the first rezoning application has been submitted.
 
Am I the only one who's concerned with the actual livability of this building??

St. James Town is already the most dense neighbourhood in downtown Toronto; traffic at the intersection of Bloor and Sherbourne is bad as is. With the addition of thousands of units from JCM, this project, and the multi-building development just East of Sherbourne, the neighbourhood's going to be way too crowded and a nightmare for traffic.

Did you see how close this project is to the JCM condo? Half of the units of each building will be staring into each other's bedroom or forever keep their blinds closed. How's that comfortable living?

A truly genius design is a design that not only is smart on its own, but fits well with the surrounding buildings and the neighbourhood. This design, though it may be trendy and modern with its use of bold color, is a blatant ignorance to the city's height limit and the actual livability of its future residents.
 
This thing looks amazing. Love the red & the narrowness of the tower. Is this thing going to happen?

^ With regards to traffic (which comes up as a concern with every development in the city), I doubt most of the people who live in any condo at at this location drive much, if at all. The people I knew who lived in the area didn't own cars and only use cars when moving in.

I've also lived in a condo which was across the street from another one, it personally didn't bother me much.
 
Exactly. Sherbourne and Castle Frank are underbuilt TTC stations. I'm always amazed there are people out there who lie awake at night "worrying" about density in the core of the city.
 
UrbanFervour said:
Exactly. Sherbourne and Castle Frank are underbuilt TTC stations. I'm always amazed there are people out there who lie awake at night "worrying" about density in the core of the city.
Click to expand...

The rush hour traffic on sherborne is unbearable at times. It's just one lane wide and yet we're adding a multitude of new condos. Something has to give.
 
TheKingEast said:
The rush hour traffic on sherborne is unbearable at times. It's just one lane wide and yet we're adding a multitude of new condos. Something has to give.
Click to expand...

Blame Transportation Services, who are almost always seduced by the slick fiction of Traffic Studies written by firms like BA.
 
I don't believe in preventing a given condo or another from being built in the name of somehow "fixing" traffic.

In my opinion traffic is a fact of life for our city that is a result of population growth and cannot be "fixed" unless there is a huge economic collapse or energy crisis.

From my perspective building housing units near traffic-immune transit lines or in locations with the possibility residents of walking or biking means that you're giving more people the opportunity to potentially choose to live without driving to and from work on a daily basis, and therefore bypassing that traffic.

I find many who drive often simply can't believe or accept that others live without driving daily, but I do, and I know many more people who do.
 
ehlow said:
I don't believe in preventing a given condo or another from being built in the name of somehow "fixing" traffic.

In my opinion traffic is a fact of life for our city that is a result of population growth and cannot be "fixed" unless there is a huge economic collapse or energy crisis.

From my perspective building housing units near traffic-immune transit lines or in locations with the possibility residents of walking or biking means that you're giving more people the opportunity to potentially choose to live without driving to and from work on a daily basis, and therefore bypassing that traffic.

I find many who drive often simply can't believe or accept that others live without driving daily, but I do, and I know many more people who do.
Click to expand...

People don't expect more roads, but they do expect other transportation infastructure (ie. public transit and bike lanes) to increase, proportionally, with the population.
 
Roy G Biv said:
People don't expect more roads, but they do expect other transportation infastructure (ie. public transit and bike lanes) to increase, proportionally, with the population.
Click to expand...

So what infrastructure would you propose for this area? There are already 2 subway lines nearby, protected bike lanes on Sherbourne, and another protected bike lane coming soon to Welseley.
 
Last edited:
I live at Bloor and Sherbourne and drive. I honestly don't think traffic is that bad for a downtown intersection.

I ardently hope his development gets built as presented. I'm even more eager to see the Lanterra project across the road get started.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top