Northern Light
Superstar
From the lobbyist registry, we learn this huge block is in play.
The parcel includes the above noted 53-75 Jarvis, and 207-233 Adelaide Street East.
Based on TO Maps illustration of lot lines, this also touches on King.
* I'm aware the lot line goes through the roof of one building which makes no sense, don't look at me, I know how to colour between the lines! LOL
Apparent site size: ~ 5400m2 /58000ft2
* the compromised roof line is King George Square condos, which I will take the liberty of assuming is not on the table here, so I will illustrate the site excluding that building:
Likely site size: ~3900m2/42000ft2
Street view of the majority of the properties from the corner of Adelaide and Jarvis:
Heritage Status: 53-63 Jarvis are designated, the remaining Jarvis frontage is only listed, the Adelaide fronting properties to the east are neither listed nor designated; though the entire site falls
within a Heritage Conservation District.
Comments: Like anyone here, I would greatly value the heritage, particularly the Jarvis frontage and would not want to see any of it harmed.
A look at the site overhead suggests very real limitations for development here if the heritage is to remain unmolested. While the over head view shows a parking area which might be theoretically repurposable, separation distances from King George Square condos would leave it largely off limits in respect of any tower form.
Empty Area:
Note that the area in question, and the building wrapping it are a Toronto Hydro property that is/was used as a substation or the like.
***
If you draw a 25M line from King George Square Condos going north, you are left with only 15M to Adelaide. That's exceedingly tight. It could certainly be built on, but it would be very unconventional.
The white line above shows a distance of 25M parallel to the top of the podium of King George Square. (there's a bit more play in there from higher up; and separation need not be as high at lower levels. That said, KGS setbacks are not large, and one only picks up a 1-2M as you rise.
I wonder what's being examined here?
The parcel includes the above noted 53-75 Jarvis, and 207-233 Adelaide Street East.
Based on TO Maps illustration of lot lines, this also touches on King.
* I'm aware the lot line goes through the roof of one building which makes no sense, don't look at me, I know how to colour between the lines! LOL
Apparent site size: ~ 5400m2 /58000ft2
* the compromised roof line is King George Square condos, which I will take the liberty of assuming is not on the table here, so I will illustrate the site excluding that building:
Likely site size: ~3900m2/42000ft2
Street view of the majority of the properties from the corner of Adelaide and Jarvis:
Heritage Status: 53-63 Jarvis are designated, the remaining Jarvis frontage is only listed, the Adelaide fronting properties to the east are neither listed nor designated; though the entire site falls
within a Heritage Conservation District.
Comments: Like anyone here, I would greatly value the heritage, particularly the Jarvis frontage and would not want to see any of it harmed.
A look at the site overhead suggests very real limitations for development here if the heritage is to remain unmolested. While the over head view shows a parking area which might be theoretically repurposable, separation distances from King George Square condos would leave it largely off limits in respect of any tower form.
Empty Area:
Note that the area in question, and the building wrapping it are a Toronto Hydro property that is/was used as a substation or the like.
***
If you draw a 25M line from King George Square Condos going north, you are left with only 15M to Adelaide. That's exceedingly tight. It could certainly be built on, but it would be very unconventional.
The white line above shows a distance of 25M parallel to the top of the podium of King George Square. (there's a bit more play in there from higher up; and separation need not be as high at lower levels. That said, KGS setbacks are not large, and one only picks up a 1-2M as you rise.
I wonder what's being examined here?
