Toronto 48 Grenoble | 148.4m | 43s | Tenblock | Diamond Schmitt

Kenojuak said:
Resubmitted February 18, 2023.
Click to expand...

What a great re-submission.

A drastic reduction in parking; every incentive to encourage cycling, maximizing skyview/sunlight, accommodating carsharing; adding (subject to leasing, a cafe concept). Also, the removal of the slip lane; something @interchange42 was rightly on about from the get go.

Very good.
 
Northern Light said:
What a great re-submission.

A drastic reduction in parking; every incentive to encourage cycling, maximizing skyview/sunlight, accommodating carsharing; adding (subject to leasing, a cafe concept). Also, the removal of the slip lane; something @interchange42 was rightly on about from the get go.

Very good.
Click to expand...
Can someone explain what the slip lane is and how it was before and how it is changed now?
 
toronto647 said:
Can someone explain what the slip lane is and how it was before and how it is changed now?
Click to expand...

Sure, this is the before image:

1678221188515.png


The slip lane is in the bottom right. This is where a pedestrian needs to cut across a turning lane, where a motorist does not need to come to a stop to turn right, and then the pedestrian needs to complete a 2-stage crossing (or more if there's a slip lane on the other side.)

Slip lanes are now contrary to City policy in most cases as it is recognized that they create greater danger and greater inconvenience to pedestrians.

After:

1678221317089.png


Bottom right again, you can see there is no island, and cars must now come to a complete stop before turning and the crossing distance is now shorter for pedestrians.
 
Last edited:
Northern Light said:
Sure, this is the before image:

View attachment 460403

The slip lane is in the bottom right. This is where a pedestrian needs to cut across a turning lane, where a motorist does not need to come to a stop to turn right, and then pedestrian needs to complete a 2-stage crossing (or more if there's a slip lane on the other side.

Slip lanes are now contrary to City policy in most cases as it is recognized that they create greater danger and greater inconvenience to pedestrians.

After:

View attachment 460404

Bottom right again, you can see there is no island, and cars must now come to a complete stop before turning and the crossing distance is now shorter for pedestrians.
Click to expand...
Thanks for explaining... That makes a lot of sense now. Appreciate it.
 
Northern Light said:
What a great re-submission.

A drastic reduction in parking; every incentive to encourage cycling, maximizing skyview/sunlight, accommodating carsharing; adding (subject to leasing, a cafe concept). Also, the removal of the slip lane; something @interchange42 was rightly on about from the get go.

Very good.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is fantastic. I'm very excited for the bike facility -- it's obviously very well thought out; the repair stations, the wash stations, the wide channel down the entryway but the elevator option (which has particular utility for cargo/large e-bike folks), just awesome.
 
Taken today, July 29th, 2023. A protest apparently took place against this redevelopment this afternoon, and was supposedly attended by MPPs and city councillors (No mention of names on the flyer). No news articles concerning the protest so far, and the group's website doesn't have anything new

IMG_8454.jpg
 
James1256 said:
Taken today, July 29th, 2023. A protest apparently took place against this redevelopment this afternoon, and was supposedly attended by MPPs and city councillors (No mention of names on the flyer). No news articles concerning the protest so far, and the group's website doesn't have anything new

View attachment 495970
Click to expand...
Lol what a waste of time petitioning... gentrificaiton of Flemo will happen, just a matter of time.
 
Gentrification is okay as long as it is shared meaningfully with all peoples across all incomes, even those with not. And I hope that is what they're planning to do with this neighbourhood.
 
UtakataNoAnnex said:
Gentrification is okay as long as it is shared meaningfully with all peoples across all incomes, even those with not. And I hope that is what they're planning to do with this neighbourhood.
Click to expand...
It doesn't appear to be that is what they are doing with this neighbourhood to be quite honest and transparent... Developers are eyeing down every property to bulldoze over and construct over. I assume once the north segment of the Ontario Line contract execution happens next year and the Eglinton LRT is operational (hopefully) we see this expediated.
 
toronto647 said:
It doesn't appear to be that is what they are doing with this neighbourhood to be quite honest and transparent... Developers are eyeing down every property to bulldoze over and construct over. I assume once the north segment of the Ontario Line contract execution happens next year and the Eglinton LRT is operational (hopefully) we see this expediated.
Click to expand...

Existing tenants are guaranteed the right to return to any new units and at their existing rent, adjusted for inflation; so there is a certain built-in sharing of the benefit.

That said, with vacancy de-control, those units will turnover with time to full market rent.

There is no proposal, as yet, to remove any rent-geared-income units, so this will remain a mixed income area into the future.
 
Last edited:
New rendering updated to the database. The height changed from 144.00m & 137.00m to 148.40m & 142.40m. The total unit count increased from 966 units to 1054 units. Finally, the total car parking was reduced from 202 car parking to 194 car parking.

Rendering taken from the architectural plan via Rezoning submission.

PLN - Architectural Plans - Architectural Drawing Set_48 Grenoble-1.jpg
 
Last edited:
Art Tsai said:
New rendering updated to the database. The height changed from 144.00m & 137.00m to 148.40m & 142.40m. The total unit count increased from 993 units to 1054 units. Finally, the total car parking was reduced from 522 car parking to 194 car parking.'
Click to expand...

Art, I think you missed a resubmission or 2 in listing those changes. There was nowhere near 522 spaces in most recent (previous) iteration of this proposal. The total unit count shift from the last submission is also incorrect.

48 Grenoble | 148.4m | 43s | Tenblock | Diamond Schmitt

It is nuts that this area was built with single family homes years after the rest of the area was populated with apartments, and it really should be zoned as an apartment neighbourhood, but @Amare is correct in regards to it creating a precedent if the City were to rezone it (just to correct the...
urbantoronto.ca urbantoronto.ca

Lets look at the Cover Letter to see what changed in this iteration:

1694031692095.png

* note that Art is correct with overall unit total above which also includes the rental replacement units and 1 net new affordable unit.
 
Northern Light said:
Art, I think you missed a resubmission or 2 in listing those changes. There was nowhere near 522 spaces in most recent (previous) iteration of this proposal. The total unit count shift from the last submission is also incorrect.

48 Grenoble | 148.4m | 43s | Tenblock | Diamond Schmitt

It is nuts that this area was built with single family homes years after the rest of the area was populated with apartments, and it really should be zoned as an apartment neighbourhood, but @Amare is correct in regards to it creating a precedent if the City were to rezone it (just to correct the...
urbantoronto.ca urbantoronto.ca

Lets look at the Cover Letter to see what changed in this iteration:

View attachment 504674
* note that Art is correct with overall unit total above which also includes the rental replacement units and 1 net new affordable unit.
Click to expand...

Okay, noted I have fixed the updated stats in the thread post.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top