Toronto 475 Yonge Street | 255.76m | 78s | KingSett Capital | BDP Quadrangle

Now we have at least 4 of this kind of facade looking simular proposed . 55, 372, 510 and 475 are all on the downtown Yonge st corridor area . And I hope to see more in the future in other locations!
 
Last edited:
DSC said:
Coming to TEYCC in January. http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2022.TE30.13

TE30.13
ACTION​
​
​
Ward: 13​
475 Yonge Street - Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Application - Preliminary Report​
Click to expand...

From the above, we can see the potential points of friction:

1639684125733.png

1639684209790.png


1639684184880.png
 
TheTigerMaster said:
This project has instantly become an architectural favourite of mine 😍
Click to expand...

Same although they'll likely get rid of all the attractive features by the time shovels hit the ground. Attractive Toronto designs are usually just fantasy drawings. By the time this things spits out the other end (approval and after de-value engineering) will it still be attractive? Probably not.
 
Last edited:
Its so quiet here today, I wonder if I should hold off posting anymore news; might not be anyone to read it.............

***

One more bit for now, LOL

***

This one just got resubmitted in May '23

Quite a few changes, most notably to me; the virtual elimination of any parking. But also, weirdly, the elimination of 2 street trees because the TTC wants a bus shelter on Yonge....

Here's the Cover Letter (some of it); then site plan; no new renders included.

1689957841077.png

1689957366082.png

1689957867349.png

1689957890511.png

1689957907923.png


1689958055099.png
 
A glimpse of revisions and other stuff from the AIC docs:

KingSett1a.png

KingSett1-heights.jpg

KingSett2.jpg

KingSett3.jpg

KingSett4.jpg

KingSett-5.jpg


P.S. other tower images were identical to the database... so suffice to say the architecture is intact.
 
and despite ripping out the parking ramps, the loading spaces are still vastly oversized and eat into the ground floor to a huge extent with only small token retail spaces along Yonge:

1689964878762.png


I'm quite confused by the size of those loading areas as they are nothing short of massive, which means expensive, and eat into saleable ground floor area.
 
3Dementia said:
A glimpse of revisions and other stuff from the AIC docs:

View attachment 493944
View attachment 493945
View attachment 493946
View attachment 493947
View attachment 493948
View attachment 493950

P.S. other tower images were identical to the database... so suffice to say the architecture is intact.
Click to expand...

I must publicly applaud @3Dementia as he found these renders buried in the Detailed Revision List; I can't recall ever finding a render/elevation buried there; that was artful and determined digging!

While @innsertnamehere here is making a thoughtful observation above; may I make another..........what a terrible layout for the park. Seriously though.

If you really wanted a playground here, it should be the entire park, other than a pathway, some seats, a drinking fountain and a bit of green. A play area that @evandyk 's offspring would rightly turn his nose up at
for being small and dull isn't worth doing at all.

A single, large, sodded space is going to facilitate uses some may not desire, and having it right in the wayof a straight-line path, means it will otherwise be trodden over.

I hope that's entirely conceptual and not remotely near a detailed drawing.
 
Last edited:
II guess this is an improvement on the Courtyard Marriott but I'm not sure this will do much to reinvigorate Yonge Street as a vibrant retail zone.
 
12 elevators for 1,791 units?

That is not good. That's 149,25 suites per elevator. There should be 9 elevators per tower, not 6.

The City could allow KingSett larger floor slabs to accommodate the extra elevators, or if not, then go with 8 elevators per building but eliminate one suite per floor to accommodate the space for the new shafts.

Unfortunately there is no legislation to cover this, and the City cannot force anything, but people need to be asking any time that there are more than 100 suites per elevator why the developer believes that is acceptable.

42
 
They're already getting a larger plate here (830sm on most floors) so there's no excuse. At the end of the day, KS isn't building this so they don't care, but that shouldn't exempt them (or any purchaser down the line), from the 1/100 regulation. And it wouldn't if we took these things seriously and implemented them in the OBC.
 
ProjectEnd said:
They're already getting a larger plate here (830sm on most floors) so there's no excuse. At the end of the day, KS isn't building this so they don't care, but that shouldn't exempt them (or any purchaser down the line), from the 1/100 regulation. And it wouldn't if we took these things seriously and implemented them in the OBC.
Click to expand...
Exactly, that's a regulation that just needs to exist (whether that ratio of 1/100 is eventually established, or there's some other formula created, we at least need one that makes elevator-riding life tenable for all tall-building dwellers.

42
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top