[ad_1]
\n<\/p>\n
Prominently positioned along Downtown Toronto\u2019s Central Waterfront, Arkfield Development<\/a>\u00a0has proposed a 49-storey tower on the northwest corner of Queens Quay West and Lower Spadina Avenue. Designed by BDP Quadrangle<\/a>, the building, addressed to\u00a010 Lower Spadina Avenue<\/a>, would replace an existing 7-storey office building. The site is also bounded by Lake Shore Boulevard to its north and Kings Landing, a 12-storey stepped condominium designed by renowned Canadian architect Arthur Erickson to its west. UrbanToronto reported<\/a> on the proposal in November, 2024. Since then, a Community Consultation Meeting was held in January with over 200 people in attendance. Presentations were made by the City and the Applicant, followed a Q&A with local residents and members of the waterfront community.<\/p>\n The meeting kicked off as Toronto planning staff Benjamin Waters explained the application process, providing information on the planning framework for the area and site context, referencing zoning, plans, policies, and design guidelines. He clarified that within the Downtown Secondary Plan, the subject site is identified within \u2018Mixed-Use Area 1\u2019, a designation which permits the most intensive forms of development within the Downtown Area.<\/p>\n Reminding attendees of her push for vibrant, green, complete downtown communities, local City Councillor and Deputy Mayor Ausma Malik said, \u201cI encourage developers, especially those looking to build in Ward 10 \u2014 the most development rich ward in the city \u2014 to take seriously how they are contributing to the local community\u2026 and how they are participating in ensuring our spaces and communities are accessible and well served for a long time to come.\u201d<\/p>\n Representing the Applicant, Michael Goldberg from Toronto\u2019s Goldberg Group planning consultancy outlined\u00a0the proposed development: a residential tower of 511 units comprising 371 one-bedroom\u00a0(73%), 7 studios (1%), 78 two-bedrooms (15%), and 55 three-bedroom (11%). It\u2019s not been determined whether it will comprise condos or rentals, but it will be market housing.\u00a0The proposal also incorporates a supply of 39 vehicle parking spaces across 3 underground parking levels, which are to be accessed from a car elevator off the existing driveway that is shared with the adjacent condo. As training is required for a car elevator, no visitor parking is provided. In addition, a\u00a0small\u00a0amount\u00a0\u20141,378 ft\u00b2 (128m\u00b2) [0.4% of GFA]\u00a0\u2014\u00a0of\u00a0ground floor commercial space would be situated along the south elevation.<\/p>\n At the proposed building\u2019s base, the \u2018grid-like\u2019 fa\u00e7ade responds to Kings Landing\u2019s \u2018grid\u2019 language. The tower\u2019s southeast corner is \u2018eroded\u2019 to \u2018open up\u2019 the corner and improve pedestrian flow; a nod to the public realm impact, the discussion of which was deferred until the built form is set. The tower design presents a sculpted character, with angular balcony form intended to reflect the \u2018sparkle\u2019 and wave-like patterns of Lake Ontario.<\/p>\n Goldberg, representing the developer, emphasized the positive aspects of height, relating a number of other towers that have gone up along major streets downtown. This generated a number of questions of whether height should be a goal, or should other aspects be prioritized. Architect Ken Brooks from BDP Quadrangle, responded, \u201cWe think there\u2019s an opportunity to do something of a larger scale here. Our rationale: Spadina is the grandest avenue in terms of scale, width, and importance, and the way that it connects to the waterfront deserves some celebration. We think a special landmark building at this point is an appropriate response.\u201d He continued, \u201cThe other thing we\u2019re trying to link it to is CityPlace to the north with its large scale. One way to knit those elements together is to have a building of a similar scale, so we looked at City Place as being a reference point to give us a clue as to what would be an appropriate scale for a building at [this] site.\u201d<\/p>\n Recognizing prior feedback, the City emphasized that the project is in early stages. \u201cCity staff do not think it is acceptable in its current form\u201d said Waters, identifying a number of issues:<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n<\/ul>\n Waters then opened the floor for questions, comments and concerns from the community. The discussion appeared to coalesce around themes related to the built form; liveability, quality of accommodations within the building; and congestion.<\/p>\n Built form<\/strong><\/p>\n The proposed tower is 152-metre height, well above the Harbourfront Zoning bylaw maximum permitted height of 25-metres (approx. 8 storeys). A number of attendees challenged the Applicant\u2019s view that the tower height should be referenced to the highest buildings in the area. They offered a countering view that the 49-storey proposed height doesn\u2019t fit the nature of the immediate waterfront neighbourhood, which is typified by buildings ranging in height up to 17 storeys, with existing 12- and 17-storey buildings abutting the lands to the west and east, respectively.<\/p>\n Attendee \u201cLeslie\u201d noted, \u201cThe intersection already has a landmark. You don\u2019t need a 49-storey building to be a community landmark,\u201d referencing the Arthur Erickson-designed Kings Landing while also remarking that it houses the headquarters of the National Ballet, both points that represent significant prestige to the locality.<\/p>\n Nasim Adab, Program Manager Urban Design at the City, said: \u201c\u2026The downtown policies are clear that not every property is suitable for a tall building even though Mixed Use Area 1 is suitable for the densest built form. The density, number of storeys, and height very much depend on site specific conditions.\u201d Stressing the benefits of densification, Goldberg responded that: \u201cWhat\u2019s very evident in the downtown is that side by side, buildings of different height and scale co-exist compatibly amongst one another. Being very early in the process, there is opportunity for revision that hopefully we\u2019ll be capable of doing. But we do believe, that in 2025, this is an appropriate scale building given its location.\u201d<\/p>\n Livability<\/strong><\/p>\n Participants questioned the proposed 75% of units in the building comprising 1-bedroom and studio layouts, averaging 525 ft\u00b2 and 422 ft\u00b2 respectively, noting that while Toronto needs housing, does it need more market price 1-bedroom units? While it is well documented that the condo market is undergoing some stress, with increasing days-on-market and price erosion, the City’s stated goal of developing affordable housing looks as difficult as ever with no affordable units proposed in the project.<\/p>\n Attendee \u201cMaryAnne\u201d called the conversation \u201cdisheartening\u201d and \u201cdisrespectful to community.\u201d \u201cThis means more unlivable units brought downtown. You can\u2019t have a family. You can\u2019t grow. You can\u2019t live here for a long period of time. It means a more transient community.\u201d \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n Responding to concerns on the unit mix, Goldberg explained: \u201cThe Downtown Plan requires 10% to be 3-bedroom, 15% to be 2-bedroom, another 15% to be capable to be converted into 2- or 3-bedroom. That is what the Downtown Plan and Growing Up Plan guidelines speak to, and we have met that policy direction.\u201d He further commented that there is no requirement for affordable units to be included in the development and it is not clear how the project economics could be adjusted to accommodate the returns the developer and investors seek.<\/p>\n Congestion<\/strong><\/p>\n Participants voiced a view that a building at this scale at this location will exacerbate already difficult traffic patterns and increase congestion, noting that Queens Quay West has a single travel lane in each direction and is notoriously difficult for drivers who are not regular visitors to avoid driving onto TTC tracks, and with cars often blocking streetcars at peak times. The intersection of Spadina and Queens Quay West, where no turn on red is allowed, is frequently congested at the pedestrian crossing to the waterfront in the busy season.<\/p>\n Theressa Chang-Hun, Transportation Engineer at BA Group, stated, \u201cBased on our analysis, the intersection can operate as is, even with the proposed development.\u201d She added, \u201cOn average, this [511 unit] building will only add 1 person per [streetcar] vehicle, given how often they come.\u201d<\/p>\n As zero visitor parking is proposed onsite, it is not yet clear where the developer proposes to accommodate visitors, deliveries, contractors and service vehicles, other than from the planning documents, which state \u201creliance on existing public parking available in proximity of the subject site.\u201d<\/p>\n Communication gap?<\/strong><\/p>\n Board member of the neighbouring Kings Landing condominium “Dan” claimed that Kings Landing has a \u201creciprocal agreement\u201d in place with the owner of 10 Lower Spadina, and that no one from the Applicant\u2019s team had been in contact with them. He went on to voice concerns about the proposal potentially \u201cstealing upon the air rights of Kings Landing.\u201d In response, Goldberg said, \u201cWe don\u2019t expect your site to redevelop at any time in the foreseeable future. We propose the setback above the height of your existing building.\u201d<\/p>\n Whatever the result of the feedback and the City’s ongoing review of the application, watching a Community Consultation provides some insight into the creative tensions between developers\u2019 profit needs, the stability of existing community needs, the growth needs of a neighbourhood and a city, and the integration of Municipal and Provincial rules that govern development. The Developer has the option to take its case to the Ontario Land Tribunal, if it cannot reach agreement with the City. How can quality of life be balanced with economic development? Which stakeholders have the greatest impact? Does the planning process balance multiple interests in a sustainable way?<\/p>\n Toronto doesn\u2019t stand still and with Provincial and Federal elections rapidly approaching what seems a heightened state of uncertainty, 10 Lower Spadina\u2019s future residents and their neighbours could be in a very different environment once the building completes in a few years.<\/p>\n UrbanToronto will continue to follow progress on this development, but in the meantime, you can learn more about it from our Database file, linked below. If you’d like, you can join in on the conversation in the associated Project Forum thread or leave a comment in the space provided on this page.<\/p>\n * * *<\/p>\n UrbanToronto has a research service,\u00a0UTPro<\/a>, that provides comprehensive data on development projects in the Greater Golden Horseshoe \u2014 from proposal through to completion. We also offer\u00a0Instant Reports<\/a>, downloadable snapshots based on location, and a daily subscription newsletter,\u00a0New Development Insider<\/a>, that tracks projects from initial application.\u200b\u200b\u200b<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
<\/p>\n