Toronto 3280 Dufferin | 50.4m | 14s | Topfar Developments | IBI Group

[Northern Light]

New application in for this site, 14s, 352 units as per the below:

*also includes 12 Orfus Road* (according to TO Maps, 12-16 Orfus is one building/property)

Development Applications

City Planning COA Application Information Center

app.toronto.ca

Site, as it appears today:

(aerial)

Streetview - Dufferin side:

Streetview - Orfus side:

 

[Northern Light]

On a whim, I googled the address.

This came up on the 1st page:

3280 DUFFERIN ST | Topfar Developments

www.topfardevelopments.com

(the url notwithstanding, the image is labelled as 3280 Dufferin)

from: https://static.wixstatic.com/media/...405/fill/w_684,h_473,al_c,lg_1,q_85/3280.webp

 

[Towered]

Great news - this part of Dufferin is one of the ugliest major streets in Toronto.

 

[Northern Light]

Docs are up.

Architect: IBI

North Elevation:

Site Stats:

Ground Floor Plan.....???? Where did Yonge Street come into this???

Tiny little park. (just over 5,000ft2).......with the expansion.....maybe ok, rather useless at the smaller size.

 

[syn]

Great news - this part of Dufferin is one of the ugliest major streets in Toronto.

I'm not yet convinced this proposal won't enhance that age-old reputation.

 

[DrillBit]

Docs are up.

Architect: IBI

North Elevation:

View attachment 328636


View attachment 328637

View attachment 328638

View attachment 328639
View attachment 328640


Site Stats:

View attachment 328641

Ground Floor Plan.....???? Where did Yonge Street come into this???

View attachment 328642

Tiny little park. (just over 5,000ft2).......with the expansion.....maybe ok, rather useless at the smaller size.

View attachment 328643

Tiny park is better than no park.
Eventually, 3300 Dufferin will be redeveloped, and park will be extended.

 

[Northern Light]

Tiny park is better than no park.
Eventually, 3300 Dufferin will be redeveloped, and park will be extended.

We'll have to disagree here.

Yes, it's better than 'no park'......but that was not the alternative I had in mind.

Nor will the contemplated extension make this park of a truly usable size.

I think Parks Planning should focus on obtaining a critical mass of land in an area, for a playground-type park, a minimum of 1 hectare (2.5 acres); but for parks to offer much needed sports fields or gardens, or a dog-run, you need a lot more space, start at 2ha and work your way up.

Slivers of green that can't have any real function to them aren't the best use of space.

If the developer wishes to provide that as 'amenity' I'm fine w/that. But as Public Parkland, I'm not impressed.

4 of those size of parks vs 1 equal in size to all 4, no question I'd take the latter. The City has that choice, but chooses not to go that route.

 

[WislaHD]

Different angle rendering from the developer website:

 

[Northern Light]

Preliminary Report on this one is headed to the Sept 13th meeting of NYCC.

Report here: https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2021/ny/bgrd/backgroundfile-170170.pdf

 

[artyboy123]

New Renderings are updated in the database. The unit count is reduced from 352 to 340 and the overall parking count increased from 209 to 211. Renderings are taken from the architectural plan via rezoning submission.

 

[Northern Light]

The tiny, useless park in this one will get a bit bigger it seems.

The proposal at 3300 Dufferin, to the north, is proposing its park dedication immediately abutting this one.

So add ~300m2/3000ft2 to this one.

Together they are much less useless; but still quite small (no sports fields here!)

 

[Northern Light]

Request for Direction Report to the next meeting of NYCC:

https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2022/ny/bgrd/backgroundfile-199199.pdf

Beyond the usual, staff took time to call out a couple of things that raised my eyebrow:

Also:

The above can be summarized as.......must talk to the neighbours..............do not appear amateur'ish before planning, LOL

Lots more in the report.

 

[Northern Light]

The applicant and the City are not having the most fruitful time of it............

It's not that often you see a settlement offer made to the City that gets a refusal report, and goes to Council to be formally declined.

But that happened with the offer before the most recent Council meeting.

Agenda Item History 2023.CC2.10

Agenda Item History 2023.CC2.10

secure.toronto.ca

 

[innsertnamehere]

According to the NRU this was approved at a contested hearing at the OLT.

The City opposed the application on it being a "tall building" and not adhering to the tall building guidelines, not providing an adequate setback from the park (3m vs. the requested 5m), and not appropriately addressing the "comprehensive redevelopment" of the block. The OLT disagreed, and approved the application.

 

[Undead]

Do you need setbacks when the park is not viable anyway? Just do offsite dedication at Ranee Park across the street.