Toronto TeaHouse 501 Yonge Condominiums | 170.98m | 52s | Lanterra | a—A

[buildup]

52 and 48 storeys instead of 58!? Fantastic! That'll make a massive difference to the street-level experience on Yonge and will absolutely ensure that the low-rise character of the neighbourhood is completely maintained. With results like this, I can certainly see why Toronto is so habitually associated with greatness. Kudos all around to those involved.

You sound sarcastic. Look, this compromise resolves a key complaint which is 'it seemed too tall'. By sacrificing a few floors we avoid the inconvenience of building a landmarks. That was an alternative - something exceptional in exchange for height.

These towers were an outrage at 2 X 58. 2 X 50 is much better because they are about 15% shorter. 15% that is magic.

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

Now you're being sarcastic, I didn't say let them do what ever they want, I'm a strong supporter of preserving our historical structures. The only point I am trying to make is every project has to jump through far too many hoops. Once approved by the city, that should be the end of the discussion.

A lot of crap has been built this cycle, I can't imagine what we would have got had we had no involvement from City Councillors and Planners, besides it just not possible to build and not work with the City. Yet we still end up with garbage like RoCP (the first buildings that come to mind), imagine how much worse and taller they would have been with no "hoops" to jump through? Across the park from RoCP is Aura which had plenty of hoops to jump through including a design review panel yet it's not looking like the stunner that we hoping for, through in fairness that really has yet to be seen.

It just seems they allow too much say from people with completely unrealistic expectations, and no real idea of what they are whining about.

See the St. Lawrence Market neighbourhood for what can happen when City Planners work closely with the local Councillor, BIA's, neighbourhood associations and the developer.

I live on Howard street, there is, if built, going to be three towers around 50 floors partially blocking my 20th floor view. Big deal!how often do I (or anyone for tht matter) look out my window? For fun, I went to one of the public meetings, what a joke! People yelling, loosing their tempers because part of their views may be compromised, really? If you choose live in the downtown core of this city, expect that further construction is a very real possibility. These people act like its the first tower ever to be built! Can you understand my point? I'm not asking anyone to agree, I respect that, I just get so ticked off at just how easy it is for a reasonably small group of citizens to completely alter (usually for the worst) or even cancel a new tower. If you choose to live downtown, expect construction. Growth is inevitable, and a necessity for a healthy city. Look how far we have come in just 10 years, imagine how it will look in a further 10? If pople are dead set against growth, may I suggest moving to the burbs?

People get emotional when talking about their homes, and good for them whether they're right or wrong - at least they care and came out to learn and express their views. Growth is good when City Planners and Councillors work within frameworks laid out for where lowrise, midrise and highrise buildings should be built. I think it sucks to lose a view that one enjoys but it's no reason to stop or to try to halt a project. A project should be stopped in it's tracks early in the process and worked on with the developer when it's height is inappropriate, when heritage buildings (listed/designated or not) have to be altered or demolished or when not following urban design strategies that are in place.

 

[sjbdtz]

Now you're being sarcastic, I didn't say let them do what ever they want, I'm a strong supporter of preserving our historical structures. The only point I am trying to make is every project has to jump through far too many hoops. Once approved by the city, that should be the end of the discussion. It just seems they allow too much say from people with completely unrealistic expectations, and no real idea of what they are whining about. I live on Howard street, there is, if built, going to be three towers around 50 floors partially blocking my 20th floor view. Big deal!how often do I (or anyone for tht matter) look out my window? For fun, I went to one of the public meetings, what a joke! People yelling, loosing their tempers because part of their views may be compromised, really? If you choose live in the downtown core of this city, expect that further construction is a very real possibility. These people act like its the first tower ever to be built! Can you understand my point? I'm not asking anyone to agree, I respect that, I just get so ticked off at just how easy it is for a reasonably small group of citizens to completely alter (usually for the worst) or even cancel a new tower. If you choose to live downtown, expect construction. Growth is inevitable, and a necessity for a healthy city. Look how far we have come in just 10 years, imagine how it will look in a further 10? If pople are dead set against growth, may I suggest moving to the burbs?

How often do people look out their windows? It's the primary reason I bought where I am.

So unrestrained growth is definately worth keeping an eye on.

 

[greenleaf]

How often do people look out their windows? It's the primary reason I bought where I am.

So unrestrained growth is definately worth keeping an eye on.

No one owns the view out their window.

 

[sjbdtz]

No one owns the view out their window.

Of course not, but one can buy prudently, and have a reason to argue against some of this other superfluous development. In my case these buildings are just far-enough away to not bother me. But they'll change my western skyline....so I continue to have an interest in them.

 

[Mississauga Slim]

Of course not, but one can buy prudently, and have a reason to argue against some of this other superfluous development. In my case these buildings are just far-enough away to not bother me. But they'll change my western skyline....so I continue to have an interest in them.

Yes, but the potential effect of any project on your (or anyone else's) view would not be a valid point to raise in a discussion of whether or how that project should proceed.

 

[innsertnamehere]

exactly. if someone buys a lot right beside your condo and wants to put up a 50 floor condo, they have every right to. but they must ensure it has half decent architecture and will interact with the enviroment around it well.

I to question why the NIMBYs were happy to have 6 floors lopped off this project. why would they want to remove so little? it will still block everyones views, as it will still be quite a bit taller than everything else around it. Its the same thing with Karma, they settled with making it 50 floors instead of 52. what is 2 floors going to do? mise as well let the developer keep the 2 floors and instead make him pony up more section 37 funds.

 

[urbandreamer]

It's psychological. Nimbies wanna look like they won, so they'll take some crumbs and turn it into victory. In the meantime, the developer likely had this height in mind from the start, and given the changing market, is likely happy to have fewer units to sell.

 

[GrinTO]

It's psychological. Nimbies wanna look like they won, so they'll take some crumbs and turn it into victory. In the meantime, the developer likely had this height in mind from the start, and given the changing market, is likely happy to have fewer units to sell.

This probably has zero to do with the working group and is more about economics. Developers do pretty much anything they want.
I'm curious as to how they will manage to not disrupt the Yonge subway line during construction.

 

[innsertnamehere]

like every other building that has been built over the subway line. take the xerox centre at yonge and bloor. the subway line was actually exposed to the elements for a couple of months as the building was built around it.

 

[MisterF]

Setbacks after 2 stories should be mandatory for all development on Yonge south of Bloor.

Two storeys is too short and would make for a very weak streetwall. Most small towns have streetwalls higher than that. Most of the lowrise parts of Yonge are 3 storeys, with 4-6 storeys not being unusual.

Personally, I love shade on streets; my problem tends to be Toronto's streets being too sunny on hot, blindingly bright days. Why would shade have such a destructive effect on this area?

Is it just me or do people who make this argument always forget about winter? In the summer there are other ways of creating shade.

I don't care how many urban planning experts tell me that if properly designed you won't notice a skyscraper when walking down the sidewalk - I feel the difference between walking along Yonge Street and walking along Bay Street. And I much perfer Yonge Street with its lowrise, people friendly mish-mash of stores which reflect the history of the street.

High rises can be just as people friendly. Michigan Avenue in Chicago is a good example. It's a question of how buildings are designed. The problem is that a large number of architects and planners have no idea how to create an engaging streetscape.

Also, we have over development at the moment. The Yonge University subway line is at over capacity,the Bay bus isn't much better and our streets our crowded. We have a lack of public space in the downtown core, I could go on. Promises keep being made about infrastructure investment - but I have to see any meaningful improvement in terms of my day to day to living experience.

Those aren't symptoms of overdevelopment, they're symptoms of underinvestment in infrastructure. More subway lines and wider sidewalks are needed, but the density of this section of downtown is nothing compared to New York, Hong Kong, Singapore, etc.

The other issue with condos is that there is an often conflict between the condo owners and retail - for example, condo owners maybe concerned about noise and smells from restaurants or bars.

You could say the same about any kind of residential. BTW, some condos do have bars and restaurants in their bases, even on Bay St, and even in CityPlace.

 

[buildup]

How often do people look out their windows? It's the primary reason I bought where I am.

So unrestrained growth is definately worth keeping an eye on.

Excuse me, you are blocking my view.

 

[someMidTowner]

Of course not, but one can buy prudently, and have a reason to argue against some of this other superfluous development. In my case these buildings are just far-enough away to not bother me. But they'll change my western skyline....so I continue to have an interest in them.

So your tall building with a view is fine but any development blocking said view is a superfluous development..... I see

 

[sjbdtz]

So your tall building with a view is fine but any development blocking said view is a superfluous development..... I see

I'm sorry. This building is here now (and I bought resale, not new). I didn't even know about my building pre-build, I've been a 'house' guy.

But within a 4 block radius of where I am, there are proposed (or underway):

78 stories at Aura,
52
48 stories at 501
45 stories at Five
Whatever happens at 460 Yonge
The Grenville Dev.
The 3 x 50s buildings on Howard
The proposed 45s building on Bloor west of Sherbourne
A 32s building at Church south of Carleton
The 3 buildings proposed south of Wellesley Station
The revamp of Sutton Place hotel
Whatever happens at Wellesley West "green space" between Yonge & Bay
Chas
X2
Couture


I think that's an AWFUL lot of people introduced into a compact(ish) area. Which is why I consider some of it superfluous.


And I'm sure I missed some projects.


As for blocking my view....unlikely. I have historic mansions on Jarvis which are unlikely to move, a historic high school across the street,
25-30s condos behind the school.... this view is relatively protected.

 

[innsertnamehere]

thought I would do a horrible photoshop of what this now looks like with the height decrease: