The zoning bylaws argument simply doesn't wash. EVERY building of any size requires zoning bylaw amendments, and new buildings are going up hither and yon, so drop that one if you don't want to sound cloistered.
42
Toronto 505 Parliament | 36.62m | 10s | Streetwise | RAW Design
- Thread starter Northern Light
- Start date
42
Northern Light
Superstar
I'm happy to listen to an argument for better, more contextually appropriate architecture here.
Indeed, I'll outright endorse same.
But I don't think the 10s is the issue per se.
I think it's clunky architecture, actually saving what I see as very low value heritage in this case, and in so doing, having a building that's actually too low at the streetwall.
I think a 3s streetwall would look perfect here. If you eliminate that terrace on the 2nd floor, deliver a 3s streetwall and elminate those weird angular setbacks you could do a larger single set back at the 4th floor that would make the height far less intrusive while retaining most or all of the density, you might be able to knock a floor off as well, though I'm not sure that would add value.
The street wall should not have balconies, and it should have architecture that seamlessly blends w/the vibe of Parliament in the best possible way.
I think that can and should be achieved here.
UrbanFervour
Active Member
Please give a comparable example of where a 10-storey, mid-block building with entirely opaque side walls was approved on a commercial street with a fine-grain 3-storey streetscape? Not saying it hasn't happened - just thought you might enlighten me so I wont "sound cloistered"
Indeed. The proposal to redevelop of the south flank of Cabbagetown, to replace 633 existing dwelling units and adding additional 2613 units (much of it for low or geared-to income and in buildings ranging from 6 to 39 storeys) drew barely a peep from the Cabbagetown contingency.
The issue they raised here is about the form, context & character of this specific proposal - especially as it is all market-rate housing. The race/class argument is naive at best & in cynical bad faith at worst. Per their website, the developer specializes in "distressed assets" they interestingly don't say anything about making Toronto a more affordable or racially integrated city...
I'm not stating that this needs to be approved exactly as proposed at this point. Most proposals evolve, and whether this ends up at 10 floors or one or two fewer, I'm not going to guess on that. The point stands that calling out zoning by-laws as being the reason to push back just doesn't wash as 99% of new buildings require and get rezoning. (Plus, lots of Avenues-style buildings go up with blank walls on their sides, anticipating other redevelopments butting up against them, however many floors they are.)
Regarding affordable units, that's something the local Councillor may want to address as part of working through the review. Meanwhile, what developer is saying anything on their website about making Toronto a more affordable or racially integrated city? That may happen regarding certain projects like Regent Park, but politics are avoided like the plague in the selling of individual projects.
42
DSC
Superstar
Member Bio
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2008
- Messages
- 19,998
- Reaction score
- 29,258
- Location
- St Lawrence Market Area
This is adjacent https://secure.toronto.ca/council/agenda-item.do?item=2023.PB9.3
HousingNowTO
Senior Member
Wherein the CBC's AIR FARCE is included in a Heritage Designation... 
Northern Light
Superstar
With all appropriate deference to the Air Farce, as someone who greatly values heritage; the one-storey facade here really isn't anything special, and there is nothing of substance left of the original interiors.
To me this is not a good designation. Its only quasi-legitimate purpose here would be to negotiate more thoughtful architecture overall for the proposal; something i would argue would be better served by removing the entirety of what is there now.
rdaner
Senior Member
I chatted with someone familiar with the project and the dance centre has until August to find a new home. There are several options being explored including warehouses and old school buildings. Of course the big challenge is finding appropriate spaces for a reasonable price somewhere in the neighbourhood or even Riverdale.
Northern Light
Superstar
The owner filed an objection to the heritage designation.
A report to City Council proposes to move ahead with the designation.
A report to City Council proposes to move ahead with the designation.
La-boubette
New Member
I'm interested in leasing the restaurant at 505-507 parliament street. The owner just put it for lease. The realtor is telling me that the owner does not want to move forward with the condo construction which I doubt.The city of TO is saying that they are still on negotiations and waiting for new plans.
So if there is anyone here with updated info on whether or not the building on 505 and 507is going to be demolished that would be great. A restaurant project is a.lot of money and effort, I cannot afford to do all that and being kicked out in 2 years because of the demolition.
Thanks in advance for your insights
rbt
Senior Member
Sign a 10 year lease. In the early termination clause include compensation for moving and build-out costs. The lease contract applies regardless of the owner. If the landlord dies and kids inherit the building with different expectations, they'll still be bound to the contract. You negotiate with a known person but after a non-trivial duration of time you could be dealing with anybody: negotiate accordingly. If your landlord doesn't intend to redevelop then they'll happily include sizable compensation for early termination.
Find a commercial real-estate lawyer and have them write your lease and present it to the landlord. As a cash-rich tenant you have all the power right now. There are commercial vacancies on Jarvis charging $1/year (triple-net) just in the hope of finding someone to cover the insurance, maintenance, utilities, etc.
Last edited:
La-boubette
New Member
Thanks a lot for your guidance you are amazing. I'm coming from france and discovering a whole new legal world - less protective of businesses- here in Toronto. I really appreciate your recommendations. I'm looking for a good commercial real estate lawyer right now. If you know someone please let me know.
If i manage to open the restaurant please come say hi.
rbt
Senior Member
Commercial real-estate in Canada (Ontario really, each province has separate rules) is extremely flexible, nearly the exact opposite of residential tenancies. There are few rules or guides. It's entirely based on what is in the lease contract, and you can be quite creative like using profit sharing rather than a fixed monthly fee. Whatever the landlord agrees to. Likewise, its also very unforgiving if you fail to meet your obligations in the contract: tenants can be evicted for being 1 day late paying their rent if that's what the contract states.
Anyway, getting some idea of what attributes you can and should negotiate is the first step. Who pays for which parts of the build-out, typical duration, responsibilities, sublets, renewal, termination, etc.
Last edited:
rdaner
Senior Member
I heard from a reliable source that the dance centre is staying put for the next couple of years.
Tyrang
New Member
I wish this isn't a case of NIMBY but it is. Reading through the petition, the two parts that makes sense to me are the affordable housing piece and the potential height issue. The building is prolly a bit on the tall side based on the definition of Mid-rise. It could prolly be dropped to around 7 floors. They can assign 4-8 units for affordable housing based on IZ policy.
Everything else are just NIMBY talk. The dance hall is really not that appealing, and it prolly wouldn't even be designated if this building proposal didn't happen. The petition request to change it to low-rise is also a bit unreasonable.
Anyways, I still expect this to come through with some reduced height and some affordable housing proposal with a not so worthwhile facade maintenance.
Everything else are just NIMBY talk. The dance hall is really not that appealing, and it prolly wouldn't even be designated if this building proposal didn't happen. The petition request to change it to low-rise is also a bit unreasonable.
Anyways, I still expect this to come through with some reduced height and some affordable housing proposal with a not so worthwhile facade maintenance.