Toronto JAC Condos | 108.5m | 34s | Graywood | Turner Fleischer

I'm pretty sure the last time I was by here that I saw a sign on this site for an application that it be used as a commercial parking lot.
 
From: http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2012.PB11.6

"This report recommends that City Council refuse the proposed removal of the designated heritage property at 314 Jarvis Street as part of a zoning amendment application. The property is designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act and is protected by a Heritage Easement Agreement held by the City of Toronto. The application proposes to construct a 50-storey building consisting of a 9-storey podium and a 41 storey tower at 308-314 Jarvis Street and 225 Mutual Street. The proposal contains 590 units and 5 levels of below grade parking.



A Heritage Impact Assessment was submitted by Philip Goldsmith Architect Inc. dated January 19, 2012 as part of the zoning amendment application. The applicant has proposed to demolish the rear wing of the designated building and move the main portion of the house from its original location to a new permanent location 1.695 metres to the south. During construction of below grade parking the building would be moved to a temporary location on the site. Heritage Preservation Services staff cannot support this application in light of the potential risk of damage to the heritage structure in the context of a planning application that represents over-building of the site."

Some interesting background on the house inside the report:

"The property at 314 Jarvis Street was designated for its historical and architectural
significance. Originally built in 1865, it was altered in 1901 for Dr.Charles Sheard
following the designs of his brother, architect Matthew Sheard. The Sheards were a
prominent family in Toronto. The father, Joseph Sheard, was an architect and served as
Mayor of Toronto. Matthew Sheard was a successful architect practicing in Toronto,
Ottawa and the United States. Dr Charles Sheard was the City's Chief Medical Officer
and also served as a Member of Parliament, 1917-1925. His wife Vera Stanton Sheard
was a famous poet.

The house is a good example of Beaux Arts classicism, as applied to residential design
and is important as a rare survivor on Jarvis Street, which was once the street where
Toronto's elite families built their mansions, on what was known in the late 1870s as "the
handsomest avenue in Toronto.""

and

"In the late 1980s and early 1990s the property was the subject of a rezoning application
for a 6 storey apartment building to be attached to the back of the house. The proposal
was eventually approved by Council and the OMB, the house designated and a Heritage
Easement registered on title. The HEA allowed the demolition of the rear "tail" or
extension and conservation of the main front portion of the house in the context of the
approved development. It was not proposed to widen McClear Laneway or to move the
house at that time.

Aside from the approved alterations to construct the 6 storey apartment building, the
owner cannot undertake any demolition, construction, alteration, remodelling or any
other action which would materially affect the features or construction of the building or
that would affect the reasons for designation, without the permission of Council.
The current proposal to remove and relocate the heritage house represents an unnecessary
intervention in the context of a proposal to over-build the property. Moving buildings is
inherently risky and in this case the structure will be at risk from damage while left on the
side of a construction site. More restoration work will be required for the moved building
than if it was left in place, resulting in the loss of the patina and legibility. The legibility
of the original location will also be lost as McClear Laneway is widened and the house
moved to the south to accommodate the wider laneway.

Moving heritage buildings is only recommended as a last resort in order to save them
from total destruction. In the City of Toronto heritage buildings have occasionally been
allowed to be moved on the same development property in order to allow owners to
undertake development that otherwise meets City standards. In this instance City
Planning is recommending refusal of the application.

The Director of Community Planning has placed a report on the agenda for the May 15,
2012, meeting of the Toronto and East York Community Council recommending the
refusal of the re-zoning application as a whole. Heritage Preservation Services staff are
also recommending refusal of the request to remove the designated heritage building
under Section 34 of the Ontario Heritage Act."
 
308-314 Jarvis Street and 225 Mutual Street - Zoning
Amendment Application – Refusal Report

http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2012/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-46809.pdf

SUMMARY

The applicant proposes to construct a 50-storey building consisting of a 9-storey podium and a 41-storey tower at 308-314 Jarvis Street and 225 Mutual Street. The proposal contains 590 units, five of which are townhouse units fronting onto Mutual Street. Five levels of below grade parking are proposed. The heritage property is designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act and is protected by a Heritage Easement Agreement. It is proposed that the rear section and basement foundation of the existing heritage house be demolished and the home moved to allow construction of a below grade garage and then relocated to the south on
the same lot. Heritage staff have evaluated the proposal and do not support the proposed movement of the heritage building as it would constitute an unnecessary
negative impact on a valuable heritage resource.

The proposal represents over-development of the site and would have a negative impact on another significant heritage resource, Allan Gardens, which is a significant cultural heritage landscape that is designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. The proposed building does nottransition to the neighbourhood designation, creating unsupportable shadow and over look issues. Furthermore, the proposed tower massing does not mitigate the shadowimpact it will have on the adjacent park

Allan Gardens, leading to a significant reduction in the amount of sunlight. The servicing of the site is also problematic. Servicing is proposed to be off of McClear Place, a private lane. It does not appear that the applicant has access rights over this lane. Technical Services has also indicated that the laneway would have to be widened to a greater extent than what is currently being proposed which would require the heritage building at 314 Jarvis Street to be moved even further from its
original location, exacerbating the heritage impacts.

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.

This report reviews and recommends refusal of the application to amend the Zoning Bylaw.
 
http://thetorontoblog.com/2012/05/1...rey-condo-tower-on-jarvis-near-allan-gardens/

City planners urge rejection of proposal to build 50-storey condo tower on Jarvis near Allan Gardens

14 May 2012


Most of the development property is vacant land that has been operated illegally (according to city planners and Ward 27 Councillor Kristyn Wong-Tam) as a surface parking lot since last autumn. But the site also includes the Sheard Mansion at 314 Jarvis Street, a designated heritage building. Duration proposes to demolish the mansion’s rear wing and basement foundation and temporarily relocate the building, on site, while the underground parking levels for the condo complex are constructed. The mansion would then be moved to a new location just slightly to the south of its present place, and would be restored. Duration also proposes to widen McClear Place, a narrow east-west lane that runs between Jarvis and Mutual Streets, on the north side of the development site, to provide vehicular and service access to the condo complex.

The tower proposal didn’t sit well with staff in the city’s parks and planning departments, who were concerned about the impact that shadows cast by the condo tower could have on trees across the street in Allan Gardens, as well as on the hundreds of species of tropical plants and flowers — some of which are rare — growing in the Palm House conservatory and four attached greenhouses.
Click to expand...

The City held a community consultation session on February 27 to get public feedback on Duration’s plan. The building’s designer, Quadrangle Architects principal Les Klein, addressed the shadow impact concerns early in his presentation. He noted that the placement and wedge shape of the thin 41-storey condo tower were intended to minimize shadows on Allan Gardens, and would have less impact than an 18-storey tower that the Ontario Municipal Board had approved for the site in 1996.

But in a March 28 2012 refusal report, city planners cited shadow impact among several reasons for recommending that Toronto and East York Community Council (TEYCC) reject Duration’s application for zoning changes that would permit construction of its project. The building’s impact on heritage properties, and its proposed use of the McClear Place laneway also were cited as reasons for refusing the application.
Click to expand...

“Heritage staff have evaluated the proposal and do not support the proposed movement of the heritage building as it would constitute an unnecessary negative impact on a valuable heritage resource,” the planners wrote. Moreover, “The proposal represents over-development of the site and would have a negative impact on another significant heritage resource, Allan Gardens, which is a significant cultural heritage landscape that is designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. The proposed building does not transition to the neighbourhood designation, creating unsupportable shadow and over look issues. Furthermore, the proposed tower massing does not mitigate the shadow impact it will have on the adjacent park Allan Gardens, leading to a significant reduction in the amount of sunlight.

“The servicing of the site is also problematic. Servicing is proposed to be off of McClear Place, a private lane. It does not appear that the applicant has access rights over this lane. Technical Services has also indicated that the laneway would have to be widened to a greater extent than what is currently being proposed which would require the heritage building at 314 Jarvis Street to be moved even further from its original location, exacerbating the heritage impacts,” the planners added.
Click to expand...
 
This is all very encouraging news. Hopefully they don't go trotting off to the OMB now.
 
dt_toronto_geek said:
Half the battle is won, hopefully it doesn't accidentally burn down now. The next issue will be the height. Thanks for the links greenleaf!
Click to expand...


I fear that something like this could happen. If you look at the BlogTO pictures you will see that homeless people are camping out on the veranda. I noticed homeless people camping out on this property last year so this is nothing new. It seems to me that the building has been left vacant for some time now and the owners are not too concerned about the security of the property.

The city planners are concerned about a proposal to temporarily relocate the building (something that was done with great success over at the James Cooper Mansion). Instead they should be far more concerned about the current situation and the strong potential for arson created by letting homeless people take over the property.

http://thetorontoblog.com/2012/05/1...rey-condo-tower-on-jarvis-near-allan-gardens/
 
Agreed Peepers, the City should have the owners fence off the whole property completely before we see firetrucks rushing down the street one night with Sheard Mansion up in flames. I look forward to seeing this property developed, but at a reasonable height and with the heritage mansion restored and intact.
 
Good news. It's a site prime for development, but of a sane height.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top