Toronto Bohemian Embassy Flats + Lofts | ?m | 19s | Pemberton | P + S / IBI

  • Thread starter TheAlmightyFuzzy
  • Start date
Globe: It's a Question of Scale (JBM - Bohemian Embassy)

From the Globe Real Estate:

It's all a question of scale
JOHN BENTLEY MAYS

The interesting public quarrel over what's to become of the Queen West Triangle -- the little wedge of industrial land south of Queen, between Dovercourt Road and Gladstone Avenue -- has been taken before the Ontario Municipal Board, where it stands at the time of this writing. At issue is the allowable density of development, with residential real estate developers wanting more of it, local artists and activists wanting less, and city hall wanting, more or less, what the developers want.

Which side the OMB will throw its weight behind is anybody's guess. But the hitherto abstract dispute put on some real-world meat and bones last week, when Baywood Homes took the Bohemian Embassy Flats & Lofts to market.

Located at 1171 Queen St. W., squarely inside the contested Triangle, this curiously titled project consists of 345 residential units distributed throughout two buildings. The one that fronts on Queen is proposed at nine storeys; the second is a blockish 19-storey tower intended to sit south of the first, away from Queen. Quite in line with other downtown condo developments, unit sizes in the Bohemian Embassy range from 610 square feet for a one-bedroom apartment ($206,900) up to 1,220 sq. ft. for a two-bedroom plus den and terrace ($439,900). Thirteen two-storey townhouses, situated at the base of the taller building, will go up for sale later. The whole arrangement stands on a parcel of land to be defined, on its south side, by the welcome extension of Sudbury Street up to Queen, alongside the railway corridor.

The target clientele of the project, according to advertisements, includes "hipsters" and "culture-loving urbanites." Until last week, I had not heard the word hipster used in a serious way since the end of the Second World War. But never mind, you get the point: The Bohemian Embassy is for Toronto's chic and funky young folk. Or, to be more demographically exact, it's apparently for the stylish people the developers have seen going in and out of the Gladstone and Drake hotels, and the shops along Queen.

Meanwhile, however, the architectural treatment broadcasts a very different message. In an interview at the presentation centre, architect Brian Sickle, of the mainline Toronto firm Page + Steele, told me his design was urged on by a sprit of "contextualism and neighbourliness" -- and indeed, looking at the model and renderings of the Bohemian Embassy, you get a sense of what he means: staid, steady as she goes, ordinary and modest.

Both the street-side building and the taller one are very plainly tailored compositions of steel, glass and brick, in consideration for the blue-collar history and visual texture of the area south of Queen. The gateway that attractively punctuates the nine-storey facade recalls (without being glum or heavy-handed about it) a Victorian factory entrance. The proposed height of this Queen Street face -- one of the things at issue in the current OMB hearing -- is, Mr. Sickle said, no greater than the imposing square tower of the Gladstone Hotel, across the street. In a further bid to make his structure respond to local architectural conditions, the architect has decorated the exterior with horizontal bands and setbacks marking typical building heights in the neighbourhood.

Baywood Homes just may come through the OMB process with permission to build the nine-storey part of the Bohemian Embassy. While taller than anyone except the developers wants, this 300-foot-long strip of urban landscape could arguably provide a needed street wall on the south side of Queen that is strong but does not loom or glower over the avenue.

The 19-storey building behind the short one is, however, another matter altogether. Though hardly high enough to be called a skyscraper -- my idea of such a thing is 20 storeys and up -- this tower nevertheless jars with the generally low, tattered rhythm of the district it's in.

It's right here that context matters. Queen Street, while one of Toronto's most venerable thoroughfares, is not a piece of great urban road like the downtown stretches of Bloor Street or Yonge Street. Bloor, and even shabby Yonge, were always destined to be lined with soaring monuments of steel and stone, and perhaps some day they shall be. Queen has always had a different destiny, since deep in the 19th century: to be a zone of workshops and workers, of places where the material culture of our civilization is made and shown and marketed. The scale appropriate to such enterprises is the artisan's shed and shop, the artist's studio; or, at the biggest, the compact factory building.

Let them build a 19-storey tower somewhere else in Toronto -- just not in the Queen West Triangle.

jmays@globeandmail.com

AoD
 
"Queen Street, while one of Toronto's most venerable thoroughfares, is not a piece of great urban road like the downtown stretches of Bloor Street or Yonge Street"

Why does 'urban' always have to equal 'tall'? Though I would probably agree that a highrise at the proposed location would be little out of place, I would dispute the claim that Queen Street lacks in urbanity...Queen Street is one of the highlights of urban Toronto or urban 'anywhere', in my opinion.
 
I think it is silly to claim that any part of Toronto is "destined" to remain in the same functional relationship to the rest of the city that it fulfilled "deep in the 19th century". As the city evolves, as neighbourhoods change, so will new building forms come along to reflect that fact.
 
Queen West

^^very true! Evolution my friends, it happens in Toronto as well- yet, not necessarily they way each person wants it to.

p5
 
Re: Queen West

Exactly Babel, isn't Yorkville a perfect illustration of that?!
 
Re: Queen West

Yet somehow cities much larger than Toronto seem to be able to preserve their older lowrise neighbourhoods. Here's a crazy thought, we don't we preserve our neighbourhoods that work and redevelop the ones that suck? There's no shortage of them.

Queen St is probably Toronto's most successful commercial strip. If it's redeveloped, it no longer will be. Do we need another Bay St? Another CityPlace? No thanks.
 
Re: Queen West

This part of Queen is a mish mash of warehouse and strip mall. Hardly the successful Queen we know and admire. Now across the street or down the street is a whole other story.
 
Re: Queen West

It was only 30 years ago that Queen West was a boutique/art gallery/bistro/deli/designer stuff/retro fashions/trendy bar/renovated hotel/internet cafe/etc./etc./-free zone. You'd get on the streetcar at Yonge, and pass block after block of dreary and depressing places that were only visited by the people who worked there. Queen West is constantly evolving, being redeveloped like most other parts of town, and I can't see anything wrong with that.
 
Re: Queen West

The whole "tall is urban" and "low-rise is suburban" thing is too much. One can find many examples of tall buildings in the suburbs that are not urban. So building height is not an indicator of anything by itself.

With respect to Queen and similar streets, how "high" is the appropriate height (and please note the word "appropriate")? If there is an infill opportunity, can it exceed the surrounding buildings? If so, by how much? I'm sure there would be a considerable amount of disagreement on this issue, and for a variety of good reasons.

The important thing is the street itself. Queen is memorable for what one encounters at that level, not for what is too high or too low alone. A poorly placed or poorly designed building will do more damage to that street experience than just the height of a building.
 
"I would dispute the claim that Queen Street lacks in urbanity"

In defense of Mays, he didn't say it's not an urban road, he said it's not a "great" urban road. Of course, his "great" means destined for tall buildings.
 
Re: Queen West

Yet somehow cities much larger than Toronto seem to be able to preserve their older lowrise neighbourhoods. Here's a crazy thought, we don't we preserve our neighbourhoods that work and redevelop the ones that suck? There's no shortage of them.

Quite right. They can bulldoze most of Dufferin for all I care, or even Bathurst.
 
Re: Queen West

^ok, you're right, just some selective razing.
Every street has is low and high spots. The Dupont station is probably my favorite TTC stop, it just needs some good higher density housing around it, both on Dupont and Spadina.
 
Re: Queen West

Well, don't underestimate the raw power of fire--it claimed that studio building at Dupont + Westmoreland this past week or two. (Which was a real ramshackle-cardboard-cutout enigma of a building; more like the sort you'd expect in boomtown Cobalt or Kirkland Lake than in Toronto...)

And a few years earlier and a few blocks west, the great McMurtry furniture factory (with its magnificent corbelled corner) burnt right as it was being prepped for loft condos.

But ah, long may the gear-factory glass cage at Dupont + Dovercourt stay--for afficionados of early c20 Modernist manifestos a la Gropius, it's like dying and going to heaven...
 

Back
Top