Toronto The James at Scrivener Square | 88.21m | 23s | Tricon | COBE Architects

[ADRM]

 

[TwinHuey]

May 22

 

[Paclo]

Yesterday

 

[ProjectEnd]

Precast up:

 

[Rascacielo]

Today

 

[amh]

I am elated they went for precast instead of metal panel on those vertical pickets and the slab edges. Really makes a big difference from the de facto aluminum.

 

[Edward Skira]

 

[Benito]

Yesterday.

 

[Rascacielo]

Today

 

[jackattack]

Jul 11 -

 

[Paclo]

Application Details

www.toronto.ca

Minor Variance application with the following proposed changes:

• Storeys increased from 21 to 23
• Height increased from 81.65 to 88.21m
• Total residential units increased from 120 to 127

No new renderings.

This MV has been approved on conditions (250k cash contribution + TTC technical review) by the CoA.

Updated renderings:

Massing diagrams depicting comparative height difference in brown:

 

[Rascacielo]

Today

 

[Dense]

Thank you for sharing this information. Is it common to see cash contributions as part of MV approval?

This is the first time I've seen one...

This MV has been approved on conditions (250k cash contribution + TTC technical review) by the CoA.

Updated renderings:

 

[ADRM]

Thank you for sharing this information. Is it common to see cash contributions as part of MV approval?

This is the first time I've seen one...

View attachment 580857

This is becoming somewhat commonplace with recent height additions through Committee. There's a bit of a formula developing, and this is broadly consistent with it.

 

[Northern Light]

Thank you for sharing this information. Is it common to see cash contributions as part of MV approval?

This is the first time I've seen one...

@ADRM is, of course, correct above. (digression, and glad he was in this thread to answer it and not atop the roof level patio at Terroni) ......

But just to add, when proposals are approved by the City that involve rezoning and density increases, what were S.37 benefits and are now Community Benefits are negotiated as part of that deal.

An MV as traditionally used for a very minor tweak of the first floor height or the exact number of parking spaces etc. would not trigger a change to the above.

But when adding further height, where the previously approved increase is linked to a benefit, is now generally resulting in something close to a proportionate increase in same.

That may be cash or it may be in affordable housing or some other form.