@ferusian making me all nostalgic with his middle-of-the-night updates.......... UT is back to its old, if you snooze, you lose ways, for one night, anyway, LOL

****

In respect of the application above.........note that the heritage designation on the extant buildings remains in effect and Lamb will have to file for removal of the designation to make this happen.

1746700686198.png
 
Those new renders have me a bit confused. Are they going to remove 2/3 of the red brick building keeping only the part I highlight in the red box below:


Screenshot_1.png


Source: Google Maps
 
From a condo owner standpoint, I will give Lamb credit for better unit finishes than the new standard student-quality fare of most developers . Higher ceilings, direct gas lines and gas cooktops/bbq hookups (although I dont bbq) it's a great value add..

( I wish my condo had this ..sigh)

The exterior designs are a hit and a miss. I feel like somthing with more brick would better suit this particular parcel. In contrast, the cold minimalism of Bauhaus works well on its specific parcel of King East

Somthing like Harlowe except skinnier with more stepbacks would have been perfect for this site.
 
Last edited:
xy3 said:
From a condo owner standpoint, I will give Lamb credit for better unit finishes than the new standard student-quality fare of most developers . Higher ceilings, direct gas lines and gas cooktops/bbq hookups (although I dont bbq) it's a great value add..

( I wish my condo had this ..sigh)

The exterior designs are a hit and a miss. I feel like somthing with more brick would better suit this particular parcel. In contrast, the cold minimalism of Bauhaus works well on its specific parcel of King East

Somthing like Harlowe except skinnier with more stepbacks would have been perfect for this site.
Click to expand...
There isn't really a site to "step back" from, hence the three level basement. This is vertiginous in direct response to the dimensions of the plot.
 
ProjectEnd said:
It's all public. 82-99 in the original decision: https://www.omb.gov.on.ca/e-decisions/pl171452-Apr-14-2020.pdf
Click to expand...
Well... there was more to the story. From this front page story...

"When the Tribunal ruled in favour of the development, finding the heritage value insufficient under provincial policy, the City appealed to Ontario's Divisional Court. The court overturned the LPAT decision on procedural grounds, ruling that the Tribunal had overstepped by questioning the City's heritage designations, in the absence of a direct appeal. The Divisional Court ruling halted the project, and it remained dormant through the pandemic."​

So the buildings are designated, but the proponents are trying again, now that the area is within two PMTSAs. The heritage buildings may be a negotiation point?

42
 
Dr. Snoot said:
Brad Lamb + Heritage = Fire. Just a matter of time.
Click to expand...
...if there is evidence to support this, then he should be criminally charged. So suggesting here this is deliberate is a pretty serious accusation, IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: xy3
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top