717 Church Street | 105.85m | 29s | Capital Developments | Diamond Schmitt

SonyPayStation

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 26, 2019
Messages
138
Reaction score
168
@AlexBozikovic Apparently this is going to community engagement. I have heard the 15-house neighborhood is trying to push this LPAT. I saw your articles on "Neighborhoods" controlling density. What are your thoughts on this development? Seems like a posterchild ...
I also happen to like the design ...
 

AlexBozikovic

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 14, 2011
Messages
490
Reaction score
2,050
@AlexBozikovic Apparently this is going to community engagement. I have heard the 15-house neighborhood is trying to push this LPAT. I saw your articles on "Neighborhoods" controlling density. What are your thoughts on this development? Seems like a posterchild ...
I also happen to like the design ...
I agree. It’s ridiculous that development at Yonge and Bloor is being shaped to avoid impact on this tiny stub of a neighborhood.

I’m sure most everyone here agrees, too.
 

dodgeram

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 25, 2021
Messages
83
Reaction score
422
I agree. It’s ridiculous that development at Yonge and Bloor is being shaped to avoid impact on this tiny stub of a neighborhood.

I’m sure most everyone here agrees, too.

Well, I live in this "tiny stub" and our opinions are still valid too. The proposal is 2x taller than the mid-rise buildings directly adjacent to it, and about 15x taller than our homes on Collier that it towers over. Just because it's "close" to future 95 storey buildings like 1BW, does not mean that the same considerations are at play just because it's near Yonge and Bloor. It makes sense to me that something like 825 Church was allowed to be 30+ storeys, but that's beside a Canadian Tire parking lot and TTC tracks, not single family homes. Something like 20 storeys here seems a bit more reasonable, to build up to the taller (albeit still not that tall) condo at 8 Park. The community meeting is tomorrow so I'll let y'all know what is said there.
 

thaivic

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 2, 2012
Messages
457
Reaction score
4,244
Well, I live in this "tiny stub" and our opinions are still valid too. The proposal is 2x taller than the mid-rise buildings directly adjacent to it, and about 15x taller than our homes on Collier that it towers over. Just because it's "close" to future 95 storey buildings like 1BW, does not mean that the same considerations are at play just because it's near Yonge and Bloor. It makes sense to me that something like 825 Church was allowed to be 30+ storeys, but that's beside a Canadian Tire parking lot and TTC tracks, not single family homes. Something like 20 storeys here seems a bit more reasonable, to build up to the taller (albeit still not that tall) condo at 8 Park. The community meeting is tomorrow so I'll let y'all know what is said there.
What is the difference if the building is 20 storeys or 30 to adjacent houses? I can understand that it would be an issue maybe 8-10 blocks away for shadowing but not on Collier.
 

Kenojuak

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
330
Reaction score
1,145
Well, I live in this "tiny stub" and our opinions are still valid too. The proposal is 2x taller than the mid-rise buildings directly adjacent to it, and about 15x taller than our homes on Collier that it towers over. Just because it's "close" to future 95 storey buildings like 1BW, does not mean that the same considerations are at play just because it's near Yonge and Bloor. It makes sense to me that something like 825 Church was allowed to be 30+ storeys, but that's beside a Canadian Tire parking lot and TTC tracks, not single family homes. Something like 20 storeys here seems a bit more reasonable, to build up to the taller (albeit still not that tall) condo at 8 Park. The community meeting is tomorrow so I'll let y'all know what is said there.
What is the problem with the height? Is it a matter of taste? You don’t like the look of tall buildings?
 

dodgeram

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 25, 2021
Messages
83
Reaction score
422
What is the problem with the height? Is it a matter of taste? You don’t like the look of tall buildings?
I am sure you would be similarly apprehensive about a 30 storey building built beside your home if you lived here, but you do not. I am biased and self serving, so be it, we all are.

I ultimately don’t care that much if they build it at full height, and I do like its design and the bike-centric focus (although I don’t see how a luxury condo with no parking will sell well) .

I think residents on my street are just a bit loud in their NIMBY behaviour, especially ones with children. Most are just upset with the City in general in regards to things they have done in this area such as the respite centre on Park and Asquith that has led to us being unable to take our children to Asquith green park, and someone from the neighbourhood being stabbed by a patron of Respite last week. So they’ll do anything to complain about any changes at all near here.
 

SonyPayStation

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 26, 2019
Messages
138
Reaction score
168
Well, I live in this "tiny stub" and our opinions are still valid too. The proposal is 2x taller than the mid-rise buildings directly adjacent to it, and about 15x taller than our homes on Collier that it towers over. Just because it's "close" to future 95 storey buildings like 1BW, does not mean that the same considerations are at play just because it's near Yonge and Bloor. It makes sense to me that something like 825 Church was allowed to be 30+ storeys, but that's beside a Canadian Tire parking lot and TTC tracks, not single family homes. Something like 20 storeys here seems a bit more reasonable, to build up to the taller (albeit still not that tall) condo at 8 Park. The community meeting is tomorrow so I'll let y'all know what is said there.

What is the exact problem except the height? There are not many units facing the street so it cannot be privacy concerns and I doubt there is much shadow given the width of the building.
 

SonyPayStation

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 26, 2019
Messages
138
Reaction score
168
I am sure you would be similarly apprehensive about a 30 storey building built beside your home if you lived here, but you do not. I am biased and self serving, so be it, we all are.

I ultimately don’t care that much if they build it at full height, and I do like its design and the bike-centric focus (although I don’t see how a luxury condo with no parking will sell well) .

I think residents on my street are just a bit loud in their NIMBY behaviour, especially ones with children. Most are just upset with the City in general in regards to things they have done in this area such as the respite centre on Park and Asquith that has led to us being unable to take our children to Asquith green park, and someone from the neighbourhood being stabbed by a patron of Respite last week. So they’ll do anything to complain about any changes at all near here.

Forget my previous comment. I wonder if your neighbors can ask the developer to pay for improvements? More streetlights, more security (the building will have security) --- it is a good thing their lobby faces the respite center actually. A building is getting built one way or another and it is probably taller than anyone will want so might as well try to use it to your benefit. I am trying to get a road repaving out of a development in my area.
 

dodgeram

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 25, 2021
Messages
83
Reaction score
422
Forget my previous comment. I wonder if your neighbors can ask the developer to pay for improvements? More streetlights, more security (the building will have security) --- it is a good thing their lobby faces the respite center actually. A building is getting built one way or another and it is probably taller than anyone will want so might as well try to use it to your benefit. I am trying to get a road repaving out of a development in my area.

I agree, that’s a good strategy and I think if done right the building would certainly be an improvement over the current derelict buildings on the lot. Again I’m not necessarily opposed to the project as a whole, just a bit apprehensive. And it’s not just me, I’m sure the individuals in the community housing apartment aren’t excited to have all of their balconies face directly (the balconies are all on the North side) into this new building. We shall see what is discussed at the community meeting today.
 

interchange42

Administrator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
25,279
Reaction score
26,983
Location
by the Humber
I agree, that’s a good strategy and I think if done right the building would certainly be an improvement over the current derelict buildings on the lot. Again I’m not necessarily opposed to the project as a whole, just a bit apprehensive. And it’s not just me, I’m sure the individuals in the community housing apartment aren’t excited to have all of their balconies face directly (the balconies are all on the North side) into this new building. We shall see what is discussed at the community meeting today.
How did the meeting go?

42
 

dodgeram

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 25, 2021
Messages
83
Reaction score
422
How did the meeting go?

42
From the meeting yesterday: In general the city is opposed to the project in its current form and will not approve what the developer has currently presented. The city and the developer will continue to work together but given how far off the proposal is from what the City might expect from this site, it is anticipated that the developer will bring it to LPAT. The main issues brought up by residents include:

- Parking/Traffic: The proposal is on a very tight lot and has no parking with only 3 "car share" spots. Neighborhood residents feel the lack of on-site parking will lead to a spillover of visitors / delivery drivers / Uber drivers etc. onto the surrounding streets, particularly Collier which already runs into issues with individuals illegally parking or waiting and blocking the street (the street is permit parking only). The surrounding roads are also already quite congested with individuals using Collier and Church as a form of ingress/egress to Park Road in order to access Rosedale Valley Road, Bayview, and the DVP. Adding 400 something residents, despite them not being able to have cars, will still lead to strain on the area from automobile use.
- Height: Residents don't feel the building addresses the requirements for transition in height from the corner of Yonge/Bloor down to the single family homes in Rosedale which begins at Collier. There should be a transition in height downwards from Yonge/Bloor, with buildings getting shorter as you go out. 717 Church is proposed directly adjacent to the Toronto Reference Library (only around 5 storeys) and two mid-rise apartments which are only around 10 and 15 storeys. If anything, the 717 Church proposal moves further away from Yonge/Bloor yet at 30 storeys transitions UPWARDS in height, which seems oppposite to what would be required.
- General (although less relevant) concerns regarding construction noise, a lack of areas for construction workers to park for the site, concerns around shadowing of Collier where children play after school, disruption for the access to nearby medical clinics who serve disabled clients on Collier and Park.

The aspects that were liked from the proposal includes:
- The design, it seemed people felt it is a good looking building
- Enhancement of the public space, particularly the widening of the sidewalks. The developer will resurface the portion of Collier that the site is adjacent to, and it could even potentially be turned into a 1 way road.
- The bike centric aspect, it works well with the Bloor St. bike lanes and potential future expansion of the Davenport lanes that could be continued east where Davenport turns into Church, linking the Davenport section to Bloor at Bloor/Church.

Overall, it will likely go to LPAT, I don't know what the developer can do to satisfy the concerns of traffic or height, perhaps they could remove 10 storeys to appease the City by having less residents to address the traffic concerns, and less height to address the height concerns. Likely it will go to LPAT though.
 
Last edited:

SonyPayStation

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 26, 2019
Messages
138
Reaction score
168
From the meeting yesterday: In general the city is opposed to the project in its current form and will not approve what the developer has currently presented. The city and the developer will continue to work together but given how far off the proposal is from what the City might expect from this site, it is anticipated that the developer will bring it to LPAT. The main issues brought up by residents include:

- Parking/Traffic: The proposal is on a very tight lot and has no parking with only 3 "car share" spots. Neighborhood residents feel the lack of on-site parking will lead to a spillover of visitors / delivery drivers / Uber drivers etc. onto the surrounding streets, particularly Collier which already runs into issues with individuals illegally parking or waiting and blocking the street (the street is permit parking only). The surrounding roads are also already quite congested with individuals using Collier and Church as a form of ingress/egress to Park Road in order to access Rosedale Valley Road, Bayview, and the DVP. Adding 400 something residents, despite them not being able to have cars, will still lead to strain on the area from automobile use.
- Height: Residents don't feel the building addresses the requirements for transition in height from the corner of Yonge/Bloor down to the single family homes in Rosedale which begins at Collier. There should be a transition in height downwards from Yonge/Bloor, with buildings getting shorter as you go out. 717 Church is proposed directly adjacent to the Toronto Reference Library (only around 5 storeys) and two mid-rise apartments which are only around 10 and 15 storeys. If anything, the 717 Church proposal moves further away from Yonge/Bloor yet at 30 storeys transitions UPWARDS in height, which seems oppposite to what would be required.
- General (although less relevant) concerns regarding construction noise, a lack of areas for construction workers to park for the site, concerns around shadowing of Collier where children play after school, disruption for the access to nearby medical clinics who serve disabled clients on Collier and Park.

The aspects that were liked from the proposal includes:
- The design, it seemed people felt it is a good looking building
- Enhancement of the public space, particularly the widening of the sidewalks. The developer will resurface the portion of Collier that the site is adjacent to, and it could even potentially be turned into a 1 way road.
- The bike centric aspect, it works well with the Bloor St. bike lanes and potential future expansion of the Davenport lanes that could be continued east where Davenport turns into Church, linking the Davenport section to Bloor at Bloor/Church.

Overall, it will likely go to LPAT, I don't know what the developer can do to satisfy the concerns of traffic or height, perhaps they could remove 10 storeys to appease the City by having less residents to address the traffic concerns, and less height to address the height concerns. Likely it will go to LPAT though.

I attended the meeting as well, and this is a great summary. I felt like the City was not buying the concerns about traffic, but they shared in the concern about height (which I don't get - but that's neither here nor here).

I think that the solution to all of this is in a few floors off of the height. Here's why: You take a few floors off; that reduces traffic. It also reduces the number of bicycles at-grade. You then expand the car court under the building so you can fit more cars queuing without touching the park on the west.
 

AlbertC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
16,514
Reaction score
36,123
Location
Davenport
A couple additional rendering views:



Collier-Park-exterior-rendering-6.jpg
Collier-Park-Porte-Cochere-1-copy.jpg
 

SonyPayStation

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 26, 2019
Messages
138
Reaction score
168

Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
16,752
Reaction score
36,043
Location
Toronto/EY
Last edited:

Top