Toronto The Millwood | 157.6m | 45s | Times Group | Core Architects

Docs are up:

Development Applications

City Planning COA Application Information Center
app.toronto.ca

Architect is still Core.

1602201973835.png


1602201994485.png


1602202011670.png


1602202031363.png
 
Today's UT front page article:

urbantoronto.ca

Two Tower Yonge and Davisville Proposal Evolves With Larger Site | UrbanToronto

A resubmitted proposal by Times Group Corporation for a large site in Midtown Toronto seeks to add 821 condominiums and retail at grade in towers of 30 and 45 storeys in the Davisville and Yonge area. Dubbed The Millwood, the Core Architects-designed proposal nearly doubles the density of the...
urbantoronto.ca urbantoronto.ca

43340-127829.jpg
 
Wow. Thats just ugly. Chop down the podium and cut the towers down a bit and I'll accept it. Something like 25-30 floors is a lot more acceptable for here. The corner building might not be heritage, but it is historically significant to the area.
 
GenerationLee said:
Wow. Thats just ugly. Chop down the podium and cut the towers down a bit and I'll accept it. Something like 25-30 floors is a lot more acceptable for here. The corner building might not be heritage, but it is historically significant to the area.
Click to expand...
It is heritage.

42
 
First observation: Reading the the landscape plan; lots of trees proposed, good chance most will die.

Soil volume per tree ranges from 16M3 to 22M3; should be 30M or greater.
 
Northern Light said:
First observation: Reading the the landscape plan; lots of trees proposed, good chance most will die.

Soil volume per tree ranges from 16M3 to 22M3; should be 30M or greater.
Click to expand...
Are these trees along Yonge or a side street, or along their own property along the back? If on City property, that's the kind of thing the City will get back to them on, no? 30 cubic metres is a City standard…

42
 
interchange42 said:
Are these trees along Yonge or a side street, or along their own property along the back? If on City property, that's the kind of thing the City will get back to them on, no? 30 cubic metres is a City standard…

42
Click to expand...

I was looking at the plan for the trees going into the streetscape fronting Yonge and Millwood.

Certainly, I would hope the City would take up w/them that the planting conditions need to be better.

Asking a Red Oak or an American Linden to grow in 16m3 of soil is just not on...........(the 2 species spec'ed in the plan)

Plan identifies 16m3 on Millwood frontage, 22m3 on Yonge.
 
A render showing the placement of this project:

Toronto Model 23-10-20 The Millwood.png


The bigger picture:

Toronto Model 23-10-20 The Millwood2.png
 
Preliminary Report on this to the November 10th mtg. of TEYCC.


City is flagging several issues around height/shadowing in particular respect of the adjacent public school; as well as the stepbacks over the heritage property.

From the report:

Height and Transition

The proposed building height and massing will require further assessment with respect to the area's existing and planned built form context, including the relationship between the Davisville School, Community Hub and existing low rise residential neighbourhoods to the east. In addition, the proposal does not provide appropriate transition between the Mixed Use Areas and Neighbourhoods designations as required in the Official Plan.

Shadow

The proposal has significant shadow impacts on the adjacent Davisville Public School yard at 50 Davisville Avenue,Neighbourhoods designated lands to the east and the public realm. Further study is required to identify opportunities to minimize shadow impacts on these spaces.

Site Arrangement

Further study is required to analyze the proposed driveway, parking and loading access, and potential pedestrian walkway on the east side of the site in relation to the adjacent Davisville School and the planned community hub.

Heritage

Heritage Planning staff have identified concerns with the extent of the stepback above the heritage building at 1909 Yonge Street, and 2 and 2A Davisville Avenue, and the demolition of the heritage buildings at 1913, 1917, 1919, 1919A, 1921 and 1923 Yonge Street. Further considerations and discussions will be required
 
trnto.com

Development proposed at Yonge and Davisville includes heritage buildings | TRNTO.com

Residents are concerned about the increasing population of the area
trnto.com trnto.com

Overall, South Eglinton Ratepayers’ and Residents’ Association (SERRA) president, Andy Gort, said that the area’s population will almost double from 9,000 to up to 17,000 given the projects in consideration. Gort said that residents have voiced concerns over the new proposal, in addition to the increasing density in the area, which includes a lack of space around the new development.

“The area is very, very difficult and dangerous to navigate for pedestrians,” Gort said. “There’s basically no room to maneuver.”

He said the building needs to be set back from the corner and not right up to the Starbucks, which is the developer’s current plan, and for the laneway in the back of the building to be further spaced out to allow a pedestrian walkway rather than designate it only for traffic.

Gort explained that residents in the area have also expressed discontent to him regarding the lack of green space in the area, which the 1951 Yonge St. proposal does not improve.

“I don’t think there’s a speck of green [or] an open space that they’re putting in,” he said.

According to Gort, residents are also concerned about a lack of amenities, such as grocery stores, schools and daycares, that do not match the rising population.

“Where are people going to get their basics, like food?” he said.

Shadows are also a concern, given the space between the two towers is relatively small. Gort explained that there will be a “gigantic shadow” on the nearby school grounds and community centre that will look like a “uniform wall going straight up.”

“[That’s] not a pleasant experience,” he said.

Gort said that a couple of weeks ago his association, the developers and city planners had a week-long workshop to discuss these issues, which he said was a “positive development,” and another community meeting will be held soon where residents can voice their concerns as well.

City staff will ultimately make a recommendation to Toronto City Council whether to approve this application or not, and staff is looking into whether the area has adequate water and sewer services. Staff had originally recommended against approving the original application due to sewage concerns.

As for amenities, city planner Alex Teixeira, who is currently working on the Davisville area, said that the city will be asking the developer to make improvements to community services, such as including a daycare or community space.

Regardless, he said that the fact the new application is even larger “creates a lot of challenges with respect to community services and facilities in the area.” Its rise in height is possible due to a change in the city’s growth plan for the area enforced by the Province of Ontario last year that allows greater density in development locations in close proximity to transit stations.The change came in June 2019 without city consultation and overruled aspects of the Midtown in Focus plan that had been in the works for six years before being proposed.
Click to expand...
 
I would happily swap the "heritage" buildings north of the Starbucks for a wider sidewalk (especially given the location is a subway shuttle bus drop off) but the veggie stores will be missed. My 9 year old would miss the Pizza Pizza. I figure if the City allowed Kramers to slap that red crap on its front before it can't cry heritage now, and leaving the derelict Fat Phill's standing doesn't do the neighbourhood any favours.

That said, something needs to be done about the sterilizing effect of the frontages being built (see also that yikes inducing 733 Mt Pleasant), since the other new condos along that zone are filling their retail spaces slowly, and with tenants like Structube or LCBO rather than something a bit more local. Not sure whether any other part of the city is doing better in that respect though - is there such a thing as a "veggie store friendly" condo frontage (and rental pricing)?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top