Toronto Wellesley on the Park | 194.15m | 60s | Lanterra | KPMB

Nice thoughts Loozrboy. I had to make a modification because some of the parkland you mentioned is actually private land owned by the condo corporation at the Allegro and by Morguard (Bay Club).

MsPaint forever
breadalbane-fixed.jpg
 

Attachments

  • breadalbane-fixed.jpg
    breadalbane-fixed.jpg
    61.5 KB · Views: 629
prettyflamingo said:
You greened over the car loop at the back of 909 Bay. That's not going to happen.
Click to expand...

I see no reason why they need such a big loop there, and I left them a driveway to access the parking garage. Be that as it may, you may be entirely correct about it not happening, especially if it's under different ownership. Is it, though? Isn't the parking garage ramp at the north end part of the subject lands? The whole loop, with its crappy scrubby grass, has always struck me as temporary, like the developer intended to put something else there when they built out the rest of the block.

Ownership hurdles notwithstanding, now that I look at it again I think I'd actually prefer to realign that driveway so the eastern leg runs straight out to St. Luke Lane. You'd want pedestrian access to St. Luke and/or Wellesley for the park anyway. My problem with confusion's alternative is that it oddly offsets the two sides of the park and diminishes a good part of the value of extending it across the hypothetically-closed street.

I don't think this is beyond the realm of possibility, even if the land is held by different owners. The various owners and the city can negotiate a right-of-way... all we need is enough money. :p
 
Last edited:
We understand that the Purchaser is sensitive to the community interest in locating a significant park on the lands and the Province has supported these endeavours.
Click to expand...

So possibly still some park space, if the City negotiates for it.

the City of Toronto did not make any formal offer to the Province to acquire the property at 11 Wellesley Street West
Click to expand...

Didn't even try? I thought KWT was pretty adamant that the city would put forward an offer?
 
Xray_Crystal_Junkie said:
Didn't even try? I thought KWT was pretty adamant that the city would put forward an offer?
Click to expand...

Of course she tried. After she fought a very unnecessary battle to get the money, the City earmarked an undisclosed amount of section 37 funds to negotiate the sale of the property. Obviously the negotiations to purchase the property from the province failed, presumably a developer offered what the province wanted for the parcel of land.
 
Glad this happened, the site was way to big for a park alone ... it would do nothing other then suck more life out of Bay.

Now I'm hoping for retail on bay and a smaller park (maybe 1/3rd the site, or even less).
 
taal said:
Glad this happened, the site was way to big for a park alone ... it would do nothing other then suck more life out of Bay.

Now I'm hoping for retail on bay and a smaller park (maybe 1/3rd the site, or even less).
Click to expand...

Bay is fully developed with retail in the sense that the property doesn't front Bay. Damn green space sucking the life out of neighbourhoods. F-you Kew Gardens! Bring on the walled city of Kowloon!
 
What I mean is I'd much rather a square, surrounded by offices / condos, and lined with retail, then a giant park at this site.

Something along the lines of Cathedral Square proposal by a fellow form member would do wonders here.
 
dt_toronto_geek said:
Of course she tried. After she fought a very unnecessary battle to get the money, the City earmarked an undisclosed amount of section 37 funds to negotiate the sale of the property. Obviously the negotiations to purchase the property from the province failed, presumably a developer offered what the province wanted for the parcel of land.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean to imply she didn't try, everyone knows she did as she was very outspoken about it. I meant the city getting on board and trying by putting in an offer.

How can we just assume some developer was willing to pay a bunch more when the City didn't even put anything forward?
 
Xray_Crystal_Junkie said:
I didn't mean to imply she didn't try, everyone knows she did as she was very outspoken about it. I meant the city getting on board and trying by putting in an offer.

How can we just assume some developer was willing to pay a bunch more when the City didn't even put anything forward?
Click to expand...

Glen Murray said at a meeting that the marching order from the Province was to get the maximum amount of money for the properties that they were unloading, hence the negotiations. Council was behind trying to get this purchased and designated parkland too.
 
I wonder if the developer will go with aA like they often do, and what kind of configuration we might be looking at if they plan to keep a bit of park here as well. (Not sure if its public knowledge so I wont mention whom.)
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top