Toronto 365 Church Condos | 102.1m | 31s | Menkes | Wallman Architects

ThomasJ said:
dude - give it up already. your annoyingly repetitive message about menkes has already been articulated. move on.
Click to expand...

Actually, 'dude', you move on. There's a reason why it's not going anywhere, you're the only one breathing life into it, even Menkes pulled the life support, you're the only who's screaming 'Don't !!!'
 
Travis said:
https://twitter.com/#!/urbanation

2nd condo coming to Church St & McGill St with Menkes "365 Church" on the northeast corner, and 33-storey, 335 unit bldg on the southeast.
Click to expand...

But the 1st one already left, so then there's that other one across the street that only got approved and built for 12 storeys, at 8 feet per floor, so I doubt 3x+ the height across the street with no acceptable set back is going to get approved at anything higher than 12 storeys. Especially if the condo market corrects, this won't even make it to the OMB until, what, 2016 ?
 
WanderLust said:
Actually, 'dude', you move on. There's a reason why it's not going anywhere, you're the only one breathing life into it, even Menkes pulled the life support, you're the only who's screaming 'Don't !!!'
Click to expand...

where are you getting that info from? link?
 
cdr108 said:
where are you getting that info from? link?
Click to expand...


he is getting it from his rear end. seriously i'm sick of people spewing unsubstantiated garbage on these message boards. i agree with cdr108 - if wanderlust has any backup for his claims then by all means let's see them. otherwise he should shut up already given that he has made his point a dozen times.
 
http://thetorontoblog.com/2012/05/0...h-street-site-near-ryerson-university-campus/

33-storey condo with office space proposed for Church Street site near Ryerson University campus

01 May 2012

The 355 Church Street tower is the second highrise development proposed for one of the corners of the Church & McGill intersection. In a December 17 2012 development application, development firm Menkes sought approval to build a 30-storey condo tower at the northeast corner of the intersection, at 365-375 Church Street, a property currently occupied by a surface parking lot. On January 18 2011, city planners issued a preliminary report on the proposal, identifying 15 separate planning issues that would have to be resolved. One of those was “neighbourhood traffic and parking impacts,” a huge concern for McGill-Granby residents who fear their area cannot handle the additional traffic load posed by a 30-storey condo.
Click to expand...

365 Church OMB hearing scheduled for July 11

During the course of 2011, the application gradually worked its way through the city’s planning review process; however, city planners had not issued a final report on the project by the end of the year. Late last fall, at one public meeting I attended, a planner said city officials believed that an appropriate height range for a tower at 365 Church would be 15 to 25 storeys. On January 18 of this year, Menkes ultimately exercised its right to appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board on the ground that the city had not rendered a decision within the time frame established by provincial law. The OMB will hear the developer’s appeal on July 11 2012.The outcome could have a bearing on the height of the tower proposed for 355 Church across the street.
Click to expand...
 
365 to 375 Church Street - Zoning Amendment
Application – Request for Directions Report

http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2012/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-47228.pdf

*Check .PDF file for elevation drawings of the revised design

The applicant has appealed the Zoning By-law Amendment application to the Ontario Municipal Board due to Council's failure to make a decision on the application within the time prescribed by the Planning Act. A hearing date has been scheduled for July 11 and 12, 2012.

The applicant proposes a 30-storey mixed use building comprised of a 3-storey podium and 27-storey tower. The building height would be 95.75 metres (101.15 metres to the mechanical penthouse). The proposed building has 322 residential units with 218 square metres (2,347 square feet) of ground floor retail space. It includes five levels of below grade parking and 161 automobile parking spaces. The applicant is also proposing 225 bicycle parking spaces. The applicant has advised it is their intent to develop this project as a condominium.

The proposal represents over-development of the site. The proposed building does not provide adequate transition to the low-rise neighbourhood to the east. It also creates significant issues regarding shadow impact, overlook and privacy for the low-rise dwellings in the area.

The approval of the proposed project would set a negative precedent for future development that undermines the policies of the Provincial Policy Statement and the Official Plan and does not implement Council approved guidelines such as the Design Criteria for the Review of Tall Building Proposals.
Click to expand...
 
Just a matter of time before the residents of this place start complaining about the Barn making too much noise. The poor gays are being squeezed out of their own village.
 
I greatly prefer the revised design, but would still like to see some refinements at ground level. Perhaps some kind of weather protection
 
UrbanFervour said:
Just a matter of time before the residents of this place start complaining about the Barn making too much noise. The poor gays are being squeezed out of their own village.
Click to expand...

is that place still open?
i walked by on friday night and the doors were locked.
 
Travis said:
365 to 375 Church Street - Zoning Amendment
Application – Request for Directions Report

http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2012/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-47228.pdf

*Check .PDF file for elevation drawings of the revised design
Click to expand...

"Prior to the conclusion of this working group meeting Councillor Wong-Tam told the
working group that a fourth session was being added and that the applicant was required
to bring in the requested 15, 20 and 25-storey renderings of the proposed building for
discussion.
During the July 25th, 2011 working group meeting the primary focus remained on height
and massing. At the beginning of the meeting the proponents lawyer noted only a
rendering of a 25-storey building was being provided as the applicant was not prepared to
build anything lower than this. He also noted they were trying to add amenity space to
the rooftop but were working through some technical issues."

So, they weren't prepared to build anything less than 25 storeys, meaning, hey, we can't make as big a profit if we build below 25 storeys. Anyway, so that's why the height on the application over at the OMB for this site is 25 storeys, not 30 storeys. I bet it's not going to get approved for 25 storeys, and they end up selling the land to Ryerson at a loss, but they'll have the honour of having the building named after them. Deal, no deal ?
 
WanderLust said:
"Prior to the conclusion of this working group meeting Councillor Wong-Tam told the
working group that a fourth session was being added and that the applicant was required
to bring in the requested 15, 20 and 25-storey renderings of the proposed building for
discussion.
During the July 25th, 2011 working group meeting the primary focus remained on height
and massing. At the beginning of the meeting the proponents lawyer noted only a
rendering of a 25-storey building was being provided as the applicant was not prepared to
build anything lower than this. He also noted they were trying to add amenity space to
the rooftop but were working through some technical issues."

So, they weren't prepared to build anything less than 25 storeys, meaning, hey, we can't make as big a profit if we build below 25 storeys. Anyway, so that's why the height on the application over at the OMB for this site is 25 storeys, not 30 storeys. I bet it's not going to get approved for 25 storeys, and they end up selling the land to Ryerson at a loss, but they'll have the honour of having the building named after them. Deal, no deal ?
Click to expand...


Wanderlust: just because the revised application is for 25 storeys, it does not necessarily follow that 25 storeys is the break-point below which the project becomes unprofitable.

this isn't LSAT 101, Wanderlust - even a seventh-grader can handle this relatively simple concept.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top