Toronto 2279 Bloor Street West | 55.5m | 17s | King Edward Investments Inc | a—A

[Northern Light]

I'll use this thread but flat @Paclo that the new proposal here is not the full property set above. It covers only 2271-2279 Bloor W.

Old AIC Link: http://app.toronto.ca/AIC/index.do?folderRsn=5759532

Height: 16s

Proponents:

King Edwards Investments Inc.,
Emma Nikola Potemkin Ltd.
and 1028651 Ontario Ltd.

Architect: aA

From the above:

Site Plan:

Ground Floor Plan:

Typical Tower level layout:

Elevator Ratio: 2 elevators to 60 units is 1 elevator per 30 units

 

[Towered]

I sense an uproar in the offing.

 

[Northern Light]

I sense an uproar in the offing.

The height isn't absurd or without some measure of precedent, but the grade-level expression here is poor.

An observation, bringing the base podium height up to 3s before the setback would actually make the tower seem shorter, to passersby.

The tower isn't my cup of tea though I'd reserve full judgement pending colour renders. Only aA thinks....... ya know what would help sell this idea to Planning and the public.....sucking all the colour out of the renders..... SMH.

****

The economics of this strike me as a stretch. BWV is gentrified, which might allow one to push the pricing envelope a bit, the architecture here is not suggestive of that.

Four units per floor in the tower segment demands very high paybacks. Hmmm

 

[junctionist]

I know that we need density, especially on subway lines, but Bloor West Village's charm has always been in the narrow facades and storefronts and low-rise built form. When you look at the streetscape created by the condo projects along the north side of Bloor between Jane and Old Mill Drive, the charm is gone. It could be anywhere.

The sidewalk-level design of this building strikes me as ignorant, as if the designer never set foot in Bloor West Village. The area's charm is in the narrow storefronts and facades. Imposing brick piers and monolithic glass at street level won't do it justice.

 

[A Torontonian Now]

I like that it is not very wide, so maintains the pace of narrow street-frontages. The small floorplate will also make it not stick out too much. If the shorter buildings are going to get replaced, this is not such a bad way to do it. What makes the newer developments west of Jane feel more generic is at least in part due to the full-block nature of the developments there.

In terms of pushback, I'd be less worried about the Bloor West Village folks north of Bloor, and more concerned with the very militant Swansea folks south of it.

 

[jmi22]

I know that we need density, especially on subway lines, but Bloor West Village's charm has always been in the narrow facades and storefronts and low-rise built form. When you look at the streetscape created by the condo projects along the north side of Bloor between Jane and Old Mill Drive, the charm is gone. It could be anywhere.

The sidewalk-level design of this building strikes me as ignorant, as if the designer never set foot in Bloor West Village. The area's charm is in the narrow storefronts and facades. Imposing brick piers and monolithic glass at street level won't do it justice.

Agreed, but to be fair the majority of that stretch west of Jane was not fine grain main street retail, but instead car dealerships or similar. Despite that, you are right that the frontages of the new mid-rises do look more at home fronting onto Highway 7 than in a bustling urban area. For that I'd blame the complete misplaced priorities of the City's urban design team who are more worried about 'varied skylines' than having wide, comfortable sidewalks lined with varied storefronts.

I think the fine grain midrise(ish) infill here is really the best the strip can hope for, and the street condition concerns could be almost 100% resolved if the retail space was split into two retail units (I know loading and OBC reqs make this hard) and the architects fortress-esque columns on the podium were kaboshed for a less overbearing streetwall.

 

[jmi22]

New AIC link is up: https://www.toronto.ca/city-governm.../?id=5759532&pid=143995&title=2279-BLOOR-ST-W

 

[Kenojuak]

Love it. Everyone will fight it including the City, totally missing the point, which is to allow private property owners to increase housing and generate temporary and permanent economic activity in areas rich with infrastructure and shrinking populations, such as right here. Cue the 10,000 moaning complaints and nit-picks but really, just let people build homes near transit.

Also happy to see the effects of zero-zero parking in PMTSAs - no bickering about visitor parking, car share, etc. Just a building on a lot, the end. As should be (and is) allowed in a location like this.