Great place for density. I like the lack of parking (makes complete sense for this location), and love that they're recreating the retail frontage vernacular. Couple things I don't like, am I reading correctly that the lobby extends beyond the heritage building to the faux frontage to the north? If so, not ideal. This isn't a location for prominent condo lobbies, it's the heart of our city's commercial strip, would rather they reduce the lobby width to accommodate an additional retail space if possible. Also while amenity space on the podium levels is fine, having some residential front the podium levels as well isn't really great. Would rather see additional commercial space on those levels or move the condo lobby off the ground floor altogether. Otherwise, even if they value engineer the hell out of this thing (which they will), as long as they keep the storefront re-creation intact, it'll set a great example for developments on Yonge that don't have space to set their buildings back or don't have heritage buildings to contend with.
 
With this new promising attractive building, hoping this stretch of Yonge, which is so dreary, empty & treeless, can upscale its streetscapes into something much more vibrant & enterprising.. A lot of new structures being built along there but the drab dull street vibe (nothing to see or do) is awful.
 
Is "Angel" a rebranded Kingsett? This looks a lot like a KS "proposal."
 
Skyhighzz said:
With this new promising attractive building, hoping this stretch of Yonge, which is so dreary, empty & treeless, can upscale its streetscapes into something much more vibrant & enterprising.. A lot of new structures being built along there but the drab dull street vibe (nothing to see or do) is awful.
Click to expand...

That is what YongeTOmorrow will be about. This had me go digging for a start date and noticed the page was updated with a timeline: real construction now won't start until the end of 2026, detailed design consolations in 2025... The implication is the Queen Street closure is on their minds. The RFP was awarded to Parsons though, so it is coming if very slowly.

Concerningly I think the scope of pedestrianization is not locked in yet as I thought it was, the language here gives a different impression as to what I thought council approved..

Approved Design Features​

The following design elements are consistent for the full length of the corridor from Queen Street to College / Carlton Street:

  • 6.6 metre wide, two-lane roadway with mountable curbs and vehicular paving stone
  • Approximately 2.7-metre-wide furnishing, planting, café and curbside activity zone (the “activity zone”) on each side of the street
  • Approximately 4.0 metre wide (minimum) pedestrian clearway with pedestrian paving stone, on each side of the street
City staff will continue to consult on the operational plan for Yonge Street during detailed design. Operational elements that may be considered as part of the plan include potential pedestrian priority areas, turn movements/restrictions, one-way/two-way driving access, and loading, among others. The operational plan will be brought to the appropriate Committee of Council for consideration prior to construction.
Click to expand...

I'd like to tag @Northern Light, I am under the assumption that early works were to start this year?
 
Last edited:
emphurent said:
That is what YongeTOmorrow will be about. This had me go digging for a start date and noticed the page was updated with a timeline: real construction now won't start until the end of 2026, detailed design consolations in 2025... The implication is the Queen Street closure is on their minds. The RFP was awarded to Parsons though, so it is coming if very slowly.

Concerningly I think the scope of pedestrianization is not locked in yet as I thought it was, the language here gives a different impression as to what I thought council approved..



I'd like to tag @Northern Light, I am under the assumption that early works were to start this year?
Click to expand...
I think YongeTOmorrow is also starting the work between College and Dundas first and then move downwards. So I am guessing you are right, that they are taking the Ontario Line construction timeline into consideration. I might be wrong, but last i checked the preferred design is the one with two lanes and expanded sidewalks?
 
emphurent said:
That is what YongeTOmorrow will be about. This had me go digging for a start date and noticed the page was updated with a timeline: real construction now won't start until the end of 2026, detailed design consolations in 2025... The implication is the Queen Street closure is on their minds. The RFP was awarded to Parsons though, so it is coming if very slowly.

Concerningly I think the scope of pedestrianization is not locked in yet as I thought it was, the language here gives a different impression as to what I thought council approved..



I'd like to tag @Northern Light, I am under the assumption that early works were to start this year?
Click to expand...

At one point, earlier, the timeline showed the first year of preliminary work (Toronto Water and/or Hydro) as 2023.........so timelines have slipped.

I read the recent update you noted above........... I think looked to other sources.......

It's worse than that...........keeping in mind all dates can be moved both forward and backwards.

Internally major construction is currently programmed for 2028-2029, both north and south of Dundas.

Toronto Hydro currently has work programmed south of Dundas, on Yonge for this year. (2025)

Tyrang said:
I might be wrong, but last i checked the preferred design is the one with two lanes and expanded sidewalks?
Click to expand...

Substantially correct.

There were a couple of blocks with varied design options, but the intent was to retain the ability to run the Yonge Night Bus regardless.
 
This looks pretty nice. And all rental suggests that the value engineering might be much more minimal than we are used to from condo builds.
 
chi-pu-vietnamese-actress.gif

interchange42 said:
You can only redevelop what you own, not some properties that you don't. In the meantime, those areas you mention all have plans too.


Angel built recently. Maybe this seems too good to be true at this point, but we can't know for sure. If this is approved, I would hope that the final result would be recognizable in these renderings; this is engaging at street level, elegant on the skyline, and brings colour in both areas.

For my part, though, it's not just the exterior that matters; I'd like the Province to act to allow the City to say no when a minimum elevator service isn't provided (1 per every ~100 suites or so; establish a formula that keeps everyone safe and doesn't waste their lives waiting for service).

42
Click to expand...
Angel has 'built'? Can you direct me there?
Ciarlandini said:
Interested to see how discussions evolve about St. Mike's landing pad height regulations
Click to expand...
Falls outside of it. No change.
Undead said:
Is "Angel" a rebranded Kingsett? This looks a lot like a KS "proposal."
Click to expand...
No, they are separate. KS used to own these lands, but swapped for other things elsewhere.
 
Yeah, with all due respect to Mr. 42's assurances...I'm still on the other side of that bursted bubble here until proven otherwise. /sigh
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top