Canadian City Proposals - Page 992

WhipperSnapper · #**19821** Posted **Jan 16, 2023, 10:55 PM**

The building on the right side has a porte cochere behind the facade. There's an elevator core, ramp to underground parking, underground parking. It's more extensive than gutting the interiors.

WhipperSnapper · #**19822** Posted **Jan 16, 2023, 11:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Looking a these buildings and how well they've ben preserved, I'm assuming the interiors probably still have some amazing original features like wood work, mouldings, fireplace mantels and such.

I would predict its being a terrible decade for original interiors as house values have reached a high in which a full gut renovation is affordable. The oak trim, oak stairs, solid oak doors lasted about 100 years in the house I grew up. There were painted, stripped, painted stripped with the times but always ready for the next trend. It was gutted to the exterior brick masonry walls around 2010. Even the cedar wood floor joists extending to a masonry supporting wall in the middle were removed for long OSB I beams extending from one side to the other. The result is a stunning open concept space with a floating staircase and glass banisters, basic white trim and, not a single fireplace. (but a live edge mantel under the tv)

Nouvellecosse · #**19823** Posted **Jan 16, 2023, 11:25 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by someone123

IMO quite underwhelming and captures the essence of one factor behind the current housing shortage.

The site was cleared around 2014 or so and I think people may have stopped living in most of it as early as the 90's. The plan is for some blocks with apartment buildings. Nothing especially complicated. It would be a big deal if there were some kind of 3,000 unit affordable government housing plan coming online right now.

I'm having trouble finding much detail on the proposal. Not sure what degree of whelmed I should feel.

J.OT13 · #**19824** Posted **Jan 17, 2023, 1:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by koops65

There are pix on UT of the interior and I think it looks pretty nice actually...

Yup, found it. That is sad.

https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threads/to...5m-61s-hazelview-turner-fleischer.34804/

Maldive · #**19825** Posted **Jan 17, 2023, 2:23 PM**

100 Davenport | 72m | 19s | 100 Davenport Ltd | Scott Shields l pre-construction

Yesterday was City Planning “Monday 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 Monday*” … a day where Planning skewered so many good proposals (oppose at OLT or outright refusals) that even this simple, tasteful addition to Davenport got push back with the same copy + paste boilerplate (too tall lol, shadows blah blah blah ;-).

AlbertC

*Monday January 16, 2023: *No to a height increase for ‘The One’ due to suspect shadow complaints (Sam will fight this at OLT), no to a stunning Gabriel Calatrava skyscraper (the sort we desperately need ;-) etc.

Mississauga

The Orchard District | ?m | 32s | GALA | BDP Quadrangle l pre-construction

On the heels of many resident complaints, this nice BDPQ design for a mixed-use development is headed to the Ontario Land tribunal after being rejected by the city. Located west of Hurontario on Dundas West.

Too bad imo... Missie could use more of this.

UT

Maldive · #**19826** Posted **Jan 17, 2023, 3:58 PM**

First Capital has big plans (yet to be revealed) for the Main and Danforth area at 2451 Danforth Avenue which is served by GO Transit and the TTC. Below is a future model of the neighbourhood by steveve that identifies the First Capital site as "Future Redevelopment":

steveve

urbandreamer · #**19827** Posted **Jan 17, 2023, 4:18 PM**

Toronto developers are taking the worst mistakes of the 1960s/70s/80s and doubling down on them: ugly towers near transit stations, terrible integration at grade, large driveways and poor landscaping. Scott Shields is incapable of designing anything good.

My conspiracy theory: when the market is slow, developers secretly ask (bribe?) the city to reject proposals because they actually benefit from the delay.

Hali87 · #**19828** Posted **Jan 17, 2023, 6:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

I'm having trouble finding much detail on the proposal. Not sure what degree of whelmed I should feel.

I'd say it's underwhelming when there were tentative plans back in 2005 to develop the then-empty Shannon Park as part of a bid for the 2014 Commonwealth Games. It's now 2023 and all we have is a (much simpler) high-level concept for something that might get built 10 years from now. Nearly 2 decades for a "plan" that could have been made in ~1 day.

someone123 · #**19829** Posted **Jan 17, 2023, 6:57 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hali87

I'd say it's underwhelming when there were tentative plans back in 2005 to develop the then-empty Shannon Park as part of a bid for the 2014 Commonwealth Games. It's now 2023 and all we have is a (much simpler) high-level concept for something that might get built 10 years from now. Nearly 2 decades for a "plan" that could have been made in ~1 day.

On top of this there is a good chance they will find some developer for the site, hand it off, and then the developer will do whatever is allowed by the municipality, which you can't predict even 5 years in advance. I am not sure what value is provided by these Canada Lands planning exercises.

WhipperSnapper · #**19830** Posted **Jan 17, 2023, 8:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by urbandreamer

Toronto developers are taking the worst mistakes of the 1960s/70s/80s and doubling down on them: ugly towers near transit stations, terrible integration at grade, large driveways and poor landscaping. Scott Shields is incapable of designing anything good.

My conspiracy theory: when the market is slow, developers secretly ask (bribe?) the city to reject proposals because they actually benefit from the delay.

I love me some conspiracy theories. I don't get this one. AFAIK, Zoning approval doesn't expire. It'll be there three booms from now. What advantage is there for a developer to ask the city to reject their proposal? Appeals aren't free either.

WhipperSnapper · #**19831** Posted **Jan 17, 2023, 8:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by someone123

On top of this there is a good chance they will find some developer for the site, hand it off, and then the developer will do whatever is allowed by the municipality, which you can't predict even 5 years in advance. I am not sure what value is provided by these Canada Lands planning exercises.

In my experience, Master plans developed in partnership with Canada Lands are much more community oriented than the people warehousing proposed for Main and Danforth above. There usually consideration for non market housing, sufficient park space, schools, libraries, etc.

someone123 · #**19832** Posted **Jan 17, 2023, 8:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

In my experience, Master plans developed in partnership with Canada Lands are much more community oriented than the people warehousing proposed for Main and Danforth above. There usually consideration for non market housing, sufficient park space, schools, libraries, etc.

I'm not sure this is true in Halifax. They did Gladstone Ridge and that's just a normal development with no amenities and slightly worse than average architecture for the time. It does have some houses in front of the towers which may have been the planning contribution. For Ralston it seems they sold off the whole site as a block and I'm not sure there's anything binding the new owner.

They do have schools and other things in the Shannon Park master plan but it's unclear if this means they will sell off parcels. If they are doing parcels it makes more sense but we're left with the question of why it is taking so long. There is a lot of old surplus government land in Halifax due to the military and management of this land has made the city noticeably worse in a bunch of ways.

Halifax's current Sagrada Familia is the NFB building which I think has been under construction for something like 8 years. But maybe Shannon Park will eventually take the cake. It will be some medium sized apartment buildings for future generations to enjoy.

Hali87 · #**19833** Posted **Jan 17, 2023, 9:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by someone123

On top of this there is a good chance they will find some developer for the site, hand it off, and then the developer will do whatever is allowed by the municipality, which you can't predict even 5 years in advance. I am not sure what value is provided by these Canada Lands planning exercises.

I'm guessing it's mostly useful as a point of reference for engineering purposes (make sure there will be enough water/electrical capacity in the area, make sure it doesn't get cut off from the road network by other plans in the meantime, Transit can make certain assumptions and plan some things in advance, etc), and for negotiations/coordination with Millbrook First Nation.

giallo · #**19834** Posted **Jan 18, 2023, 1:36 AM**

67-storey tower for downtown gets nod from Surrey council
City council passed third-reading approval Monday after public hearing

Public hearing Monday night on 67-storey tower for downtown. (Image: Chris Dikeakos Architects Inc./surrey.ca)

67-storey tower for downtown gets nod from Surrey council
City council passed third-reading approval Monday after public hearing

TOM ZYTARUKJan. 16, 2023 10:37 a.m.LOCAL NEWSNEWS

A proposal to develop a 67-storey tower in Surrey’s city centre got third-reading approval from council after it went to a public hearing Monday, Jan. 16 at city hall.

Aimforce Surrey Centre 1 Ltd.’s project, at 10201-10239 King George Boulevard, features a 678-foot-tall mixed-used high-rise consisting of a seven-storey commercial and office podium.

It includes 19,422 square metres of commercial and office floor space and an eight-storey residential podium and residential tower with 746 dwelling units including studios to three-bedroom apartments.

Full article here:

https://www.surreynowleader.com/news/67-...s-to-surrey-public-hearing-monday-night/

giallo · #**19835** Posted **Jan 18, 2023, 2:42 AM**

'Citizen' in Metrotown is prepping for construction. It's a 66 storey mixed use tower.

Photo by SSP Vancouver forumer Lexus

Maldive · #**19836** Posted **Jan 18, 2023, 6:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by giallo

Aimforce Surrey Centre 1 Ltd.’s project, at 10201-10239 King George Boulevard, features a 678-foot-tall mixed-used high-rise consisting of a seven-storey commercial and office podium.

This is a joke right?

Will crush the opposition in the 'Ugly Canada' thread if built.... but presumably they'll have a budget to hire an architect.

TorontoDrew · #**19837** Posted **Jan 18, 2023, 6:53 PM**

It reminds me a bit of some of the stuff we saw at the start of the boom back in the early 2000's.

SFUVancouver · #**19838** Posted **Jan 18, 2023, 6:58 PM**

^ And that's before the value engineering process.

WhipperSnapper · #**19839** Posted **Jan 18, 2023, 7:01 PM**

It's disjointed and the residential tier of the podium, IMHO, can only be described as ugly. However, I'm still a little surprised by the reaction given what has been posted over the past year in the thread.

I wonder ... multiple levels of commercial in a podium building is alot less common in Toronto.

Citizen is going to need a deep hole; perhaps record breaking.

SFUVancouver · #**19840** Posted **Jan 18, 2023, 7:24 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

I wonder ... multiple levels of commercial in a podium building is alot less common in Toronto.

That's become a fairly common model for suburban high-density TOD development. One can incorporate substantial square footage of office space (50,000-150,000+ sqft is fairly standard) with grade-related retail and a few hundred condo or rental apartment units above. In aggregate it starts adding up quickly at a precinct scale and has the benefit of dispersing daytime employment body heat over a larger area to help activate an area with pedestrian activity while still keeping it concentrated within walking distance of a SkyTrain station.