Toronto St Lawrence Condos at 158 Front | 91.44m | 26s | Cityzen | a—A

Register123 said:
Are those solar panels on the roof of that community housing building to the immediate south?
Click to expand...
Yes, there are panels on the TCHC buildings on Front Street just west of Lower Sherbourne (above the public library) and the (connected) TCHC building on Lower Sherbourne and The Esplanade.
 
Last edited:
It's important to note that the SLNA really only represents the buildings along the Esplanade and not the whole neighbourhood.
 
I live about 5 blocks from here, and although I generally like the idea of added density on Front, I think this thing is too tall and bulky (I think the podium is OK). It puzzles me though how the OMB noted that there's absolutely nothing of that height in the area, and that it's located in the original 10 blocks of the city, but still argued that it fits. Oh well, at least they're requesting more family sized units and more amenity space, let's see if they come back with something substantial.
 
DSC said:
The OMB has spoken, the neighbourhood and the neighbours are NOT happy. http://www.slna.ca/slna-news-pdfs/154 Front Street Decision.pdf
Click to expand...
Hope the neighbourhood asks their councillor how it was that this appeal was yet another one where the developers had to make no argument beyond the City's failure to meet statutory deadlines?
TheBigBadOMB said:
In December of 2011, the proponent appealed to this Board, the failure of City Council to make a decision on its re-zoning application within the statutory time period.
Click to expand...
I sometimes think the Planning Department needs less of a Keesmaat and more of a Byford, with his "KPIs" and what not. The number of OMB appeals based solely on delay is for me a pretty important "KPI". Lots of red traffic lights on a regular Chief Planner's Report might point up how easy a target this Department has been for underresourcing in successive administrations while the Councillors are busy thinking up ways to spend Section 37 money. There's also the problem of where the City talks about doing heritage studies but unless they ACTUALLY DO THEM the mere assertion that it might happen carries no weight with bodies like OMB.
TheBigBadOMB said:
The Board also notes its historical significance as the birthplace of the City. However, the Board also notes that the original ten block plan is not part of a designated HCD nor has the City yet decided to initiate a heritage study for this area.
Click to expand...
Not being terribly familiar with the area I don't have a view on this application or the OMB decision itself but communities are not well served when the City is obliged to fight at OMB rather than obliging the proponent to attempt a reversal of a decision of Council. If Council can't get the decisions done in 60 days then they need to increase staffing in the department, study ways to get more decisions out by improving any procedural issues such as inefficient information management, petition the provision to increase the window for appeal beyond 60 days or (probably best to do) all three.
 
From OMB Decision: "The proponent's architect asserted that it is better to have a podium with two slim towers of 22 and 26 storeys rather than have a slab building of 15-17 storeys which would achieve similar density. He argued that a slab building covering the entire site at 15-17 storeys would be overbearing in terms of its massing and out of context with the streetscape and pedestrian realm and would be the wrong design option for this site". Agreed!

Looking forward to seeing the revised 22 and 26 storey building renderings and site plans with the bridge still intact. I'm impressed with Cityzen's bridges at Pier 27.
 
Aren't the last rendering we saw of this project consistent with what the proposal is now?

I hope it doesn't change too much; I really liked where this proposal was at last time I saw it. The form also struck me as more of a chunky midrise form which is better for this neighbourhood than an overly slim, unarticulated point tower.

I'm having a little selfish moment of happiness since as much as I hate the OMB, this is one of my favourite proposed projects. It's beautifully neo-modernist without being entirely glazed.

154fh.png
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
^Yup, these ones....I'm hoping it doesn't change much either when finalized, I'm sure it won't. Maybe just the interiors/floor plans will be reconfigured for the 3 bedroom units.

It's one of my favorite projects, too. I park here going to night school at GB, so at least we can move from talking about a parking lot (which secretly I love at $5 lol) to this getting started this year with marketing, etc.
 
Last edited:
AndreaPalladio said:
It's important to note that the SLNA really only represents the buildings along the Esplanade and not the whole neighbourhood.
Click to expand...
That is actually untrue; though there are probably more member buildings south of King than north of it - probably because there are more condos south of it. The membership distribution is shown at http://www.slna.ca/slna-members.html
 
OMB said:
The City argued that the proposal at 26 storeys in height would set the new standard for the height datum within the surrounding area and in particular along Front Street. The City argued that an approval at 26 storeys would be precedent setting. The Board has already noted in its reasons and analysis, that in determining compatibility with the physical character of the area, the proposed development must be evaluated in terms of its design, massing and scale. It is the Board‟s view that for those developable sites within close proximity (as identified by the City), if appealed to this Board, the same evaluative process must be undertaken and each proposal would be determined on its own merits.
Click to expand...

...and yet our narrow minded councillors still argue about "precedent setting" projects like Massey. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, it'll be a horrible day for Toronto if Wong-Tam and Minnan-Wong succeed in making us an OMB-exempt zone. Imagine councillors rejecting projects to gain support of NIMBYs (and keep their 3 figure salaries). That's a pretty grim outlook that will hopefully never be realized.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top