Toronto TeaHouse 501 Yonge Condominiums | 170.98m | 52s | Lanterra | a—A

This podium is a direct result of needing to provide parking at this site. I'm pretty sure Lanterra did not want to have to build all this parking above the subway tunnel on a constricted site, but here we are and so they did.

Imagine the extra housing or whatever we could have had if we required no parking... On Yonge St... next to 2 subway stations... in a walkable area....

But yes let's blame the glass on this one...
 
mrxbombastic said:
This podium is a direct result of needing to provide parking at this site. I'm pretty sure Lanterra did not want to have to build all this parking above the subway tunnel on a constricted site, but here we are and so they did.

Imagine the extra housing or whatever we could have had if we required no parking... On Yonge St... next to 2 subway stations... in a walkable area....

But yes let's blame the glass on this one...
Click to expand...
Lanterra had to put in above ground parking, sure. It doesn't necessarily follow that the rest of ground level needs to be a shit show. But it is. So it IS their fault.
 
This isn't my favourite project whatsoever, but the detailing of the brick portion of the podium is head and shoulders above most condominium project podiums in the city. Overall I don't love the rest of the podium but I find the northernmost portion is really nicely done.
 
Bjays92 said:
City said no iirc

It was discussed prior in this thread. I think it's the best option as do other members but the city seems to have some issue with screens and lights.
Click to expand...
It was mentioned that Urban Design at the City generally doesn't favour such things, not that they specifically said no in this case.

42
 
mr24 said:
I am just curious, why not wrap up the parking with big LED billboard?
Click to expand...
Likely concerns about how bright it would be at night given that that any screen could potentially project significant amounts of light into the neighbouring hotel and various residential buildings in the area (the northeast corner of Halo in particular would probably not be nice to live in with a giant screen glowing outside at night). Now there could have been ways around that by regulating the allowed brightness at night, but avoiding that headache was probably the logic the city would have had here, assuming a screen was ever even proposed.
 
A&W said:
They are still providing Danby brand mosquito coil type range as standard in Teahouse condos. Have not seen this in newly built for the longest time.

C5405905_3.jpg
Click to expand...
Builder's customer care team said any white appliances, e.g. Stove or Fridge, are temporary due to supply chain challenge of their vendor and will be replaced by S/S appliances when available. But no specific timeline to get it done at this moment.
 
Johnny Au said:
November 7, 2021:

View attachment 361759View attachment 361760View attachment 361761View attachment 361762View attachment 361763View attachment 361764View attachment 361765View attachment 361766View attachment 361767View attachment 361768View attachment 361769View attachment 361770View attachment 361771View attachment 361772View attachment 361773
Click to expand...
Does anyone know why none of these new builds right on Yonge (this and Clover) are required to plant any trees on Yonge St? There's no trees on a Yonge sidewalk from College to Bloor, with the exception of those in front of the Marriott. I feel like with these new Yonge-fronting builds having greater setbacks the city should be demanding trees from them (at site plan approval). The lack of trees makes most of Yonge look so much more sterile than downtown streets like Queen, King, Bay, or Jarvis St (though Church St is fairly barren as well)
 
formerTorontonian said:
Does anyone know why none of these new builds right on Yonge (this and Clover) are required to plant any trees on Yonge St? There's no trees on a Yonge sidewalk from College to Bloor, with the exception of those in front of the Marriott. I feel like with these new Yonge-fronting builds having greater setbacks the city should be demanding trees from them (at site plan approval). The lack of trees makes most of Yonge look so much more sterile than downtown streets like Queen, King, Bay, or Jarvis St (though Church St is fairly barren as well)
Click to expand...
I believe it's because there's simply not enough room. For its heavy pedestrian volume Yonge has very narrow sidewalks, so any trees and related infrastructure (planters, beds, etc.) would make sidewalk crowding even worse. Setbacks might not always be possible either since many developments along Yonge preserve the historic retail frontage (which they should).

I think the solution is going to be when (if?) they finally reduce Yonge to 2 lanes of vehicle traffic and then extend the sidewalks. Or remove vehicle traffic altogether but I'm not sure that's in the cards.
 
egotrippin said:
I believe it's because there's simply not enough room. For its heavy pedestrian volume Yonge has very narrow sidewalks, so any trees and related infrastructure (planters, beds, etc.) would make sidewalk crowding even worse. Setbacks might not always be possible either since many developments along Yonge preserve the historic retail frontage (which they should).

I think the solution is going to be when (if?) they finally reduce Yonge to 2 lanes of vehicle traffic and then extend the sidewalks. Or remove vehicle traffic altogether but I'm not sure that's in the cards.
Click to expand...
Also given the city may reduce Yonge by 2 lanes through this area, there may be an aversion to adding trees now, that will just end up being removed if/when the sidewalks get widened. We're likely going to have to wait for a rebuild of the College-to-Bloor section of the street (which should eventually happen to replace the aging sewer infrastructure, as is happening South of College) to get any trees along here.

formerTorontonian said:
(though Church St is fairly barren as well)
Click to expand...
Church St's lack of greenery is definitely an issue of the sidewalks being too small. There's barely enough space for the volume of people walking along parts of Church, let alone trees. Ideally we should reduce it to two lanes of traffic and add some trees in the process. Would have been nice to do that when the street was recently repaved north of Wellesley, but oh well.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top