News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto Year-End Poll: Vote on the Best Buildings of 2024, presented by Sapphire Balconies
 1K     5 
News   Dec 20, 2024
UrbanToronto's Social Media Presence Skyrocketed in 2024
 781     2 
News   Dec 20, 2024
Mattamy Homes Records A Year of Accomplishments
 1.4K     0 

91 King Street East (Albany Club, 25s, WZMH Architects)

androiduk

androiduk

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 3, 2008
Messages
6,966
Reaction score
1,838
Location
Yonge & Bloor
This address covers the area from the parking lot at Leader Lane to the Albany Club


Application: Zoning Review Status: Not Started

Location: 91 KING ST E
TORONTO ON M5C 1G3

Ward 28: Toronto Centre-Rosedale


Application#: 12 107117 ZPR 00 ZR Accepted Date: Jan 17, 2012

Project: Multiple-Use Building New Building

Description: Proposal to construct new 21 storey mixed use building with four below levels of below grade parking, commercial use on ground floor, office and residential above. Proposed building will encompass lots 71-95 King Street East.


Captureking.JPG
 
Those addresses cover the entire block!

Losing this row of historical lowrises to some bland condo schlock is unacceptable.
 
Ramako said:
Those addresses cover the entire block!

Losing this row of historical lowrises to some bland condo schlock is unacceptable.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Facadectomy isn't acceptable either. Leave these alone. Give the owners tax leniency. Greed is the only motive for messing with these, not the good of the city or it's inhabitants.
 
I agree. For a city that bemoans its past historically disrespectful behaviour so much there is an awful lot of adulteration of historical structures still going on. There are enough still-to-be-developed parking lots and worthless architecture that should be demolished laying around downtown that we shouldn't have to envelope good historical stretches like this one in new buildings.
 
Just throwing it out there, but isn't it possible that this project does not, infact, involve significant retro-fits or the demolition to the historic buildings? May this simply be an error? The parking lot is large enough on its own to be a development parcel.
 
Any historical value for 73 and 75 King is long gone. The rest of the block up to the Albany Club can be cleaned up but I do question why these modest buildings are worth complete protection while something as modest but a little more recent is apparently less deserving and entirely disposable. The Marine Building, etc. aren't exactly the quality of the Milburn Building in behind on Colborne. Even some of our recent condo towers have greater architectural merit.
 
Oddly the Albany Club is also applying for a roof deck, or a zoning review for one.

Application: Zoning Review Status: Not Started

Location: 91 KING ST E
TORONTO ON M5C 1G3

Ward 28: Toronto Centre-Rosedale

Application#: 12 107102 ZPR 00 ZR Accepted Date: Jan 17, 2012

Project: Non-Residential Building Addition

Description: Proposal for interior alterations to fourth floor and construction of new roof top deck. Tenant is the Albany Club of Toronto.
 
skorji said:
Just throwing it out there, but isn't it possible that this project does not, infact, involve significant retro-fits or the demolition to the historic buildings? May this simply be an error? The parking lot is large enough on its own to be a development parcel.
Click to expand...
Good point, the parking lot North of Colborne would be part of these addresses?
 
This might be a similar development to Five at Yonge & St. Joseph. They'll keep and restore the streetscape and build units on the upper floors of the existing buildings.
 
Hopefully the heritage structures are spared in their entirety. That being said, the height or amount of floors seems perfect for the location. Not too tall being just east of st james church/park and not too short being just steps east of the financial core. Hopefully the design and the developers respect for that block's heritage are as well thought out as how many floors they want.
 
skorji said:
Just throwing it out there, but isn't it possible that this project does not, infact, involve significant retro-fits or the demolition to the historic buildings? May this simply be an error? The parking lot is large enough on its own to be a development parcel.
Click to expand...

There have been proposals that in fact do molest the historic buildings in this stretch. This could be a different proposal, but it's best to keep a watchful eye on this block.
 
Last edited:
Could there be some sort of collaboration going on here with Freed? Or perhaps, someone is trying to get approval for this, then flip it to Freed? It seems a little late considering the Colborne sales centre appears to be going up.

Between this and 81 Wellesley being torn down today I'm feeling like heritage properties need some love. At least CB2 is looking sharp.
 
greenleaf said:
Could there be some sort of collaboration going on here with Freed? Or perhaps, someone is trying to get approval for this, then flip it to Freed? It seems a little late considering the Colborne sales centre appears to be going up.
Click to expand...

The Freed sales centre really is a puzzle as they have not put in any kind of development application and it is surely hard to sell a condo if you don't know whether you will get permission for 15 floors or 36.
I actually doubt that this King Street Zoning enquiry(and subsequent project?) is connected to the Freed project and remember that Freed does not own the part of the Colbourne Street parking lot immediately east of Tom Jones.
 
The parking lot by itself seems too skinny for underground parking (4 levels of it). It seems like this would require a bit of demolition. I'm going to guess facadomy.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top