urbandreamer
recession proof
Keep the buildings, then do an Alsop-OCAD-styled condo on stilts.
|
|
|
596 Church Street (Church 18 Holdings, 25s, RAW) DEAD
- Thread starter Automation Gallery
- Start date
SP!RE
°°°°°°
A whimsical project like that would be perfect for the Village 
androiduk
Senior Member
Bunch of suits around taking pics of details on 67 & 69 Gloucester.
androiduk
Senior Member
The writing's on the wall
Last edited:
UrbanFervour
Active Member
Restored heritage buildings at grade? Sounds promising. No mention of facade preservations. Maybe a sensitive "Five"-style hybrid?
I hope they tear down the one adjacent to Church however, and extend a robust retail landscape northward towards Bloor.
I hope they tear down the one adjacent to Church however, and extend a robust retail landscape northward towards Bloor.
androiduk
Senior Member
^ It does sound more promising and I'm happy about the retail. That should help extend the village a bit.
That sounds far better than what what reported in Xtra (and quoted in the first post in this thread.) I wonder if the outrage here (and whoever else registered it - were there others?) helped convince the developer to change their tune?
42
42
condovo
Senior Member
Anything that extends the retail strip is fine by me. The Village is not much more than two blocks between Church and Alexander. Outside of this there are too many interruptions to the retail flow. This development could help a lot. Next, get rid of the entire block on the west side of Church from Wellesley to Dundonald. The east side can go too.
Rowe
Active Member
Question: Is this the building done by RAW Design? (Which has the most annoying site in the history of ever)
DESCRIPTION
"The village in downtown Toronto was a once thriving community however it is in need of some new energy and investment. This project proposes to add density and intensify uses at the edge of the village while extending the urban and retail character of the area. This project retains three significant heritage structures on the site using an innovative system of retention and relocation, and maintains a long term restaurant, a local institution in place. Each components is rendered in simple form and articulation giving the development a contemporary expression. The lower portions of the building use brick, and precast detailing to provide a texture consistent the heritage structures on the block. The positioning of each of the components is intended to provide an a distinctive massing and step back decisively to preserve the intimate street character of Church Street and frame retained heritage elements."
I was trying to get the picture, but the site is so lame.
DESCRIPTION
"The village in downtown Toronto was a once thriving community however it is in need of some new energy and investment. This project proposes to add density and intensify uses at the edge of the village while extending the urban and retail character of the area. This project retains three significant heritage structures on the site using an innovative system of retention and relocation, and maintains a long term restaurant, a local institution in place. Each components is rendered in simple form and articulation giving the development a contemporary expression. The lower portions of the building use brick, and precast detailing to provide a texture consistent the heritage structures on the block. The positioning of each of the components is intended to provide an a distinctive massing and step back decisively to preserve the intimate street character of Church Street and frame retained heritage elements."
I was trying to get the picture, but the site is so lame.
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
I was one of those registering the outrage. If they are planning on constructing behind these properties then yes, but I don't think that there is enough space behind these buildings. What I expect is the backs of the heritage homes will be chopped off and integrated into the proposal. The only other option is moving 580 & 582 closer to the street but it still wouldn't leave a lot of room. Until we see detailed plans, not acceptable.
A reminder of the properties affected:
Last edited:
condovo
Senior Member
^^ Based on those pics, and as someone who lived on Dundonald for five years, I say very acceptable to me.
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
I would be OK with chopping off the backs of 592 Church and 61 & 67 Gloucester (the apartment complexes) then building in behind but definitely not involving 580, 582 or 584 Church St. - and only after seeing detailed proposals. Period.
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
Your joking, right? It's all busy, diverse retail along there, and then the park on the east side past Dudley's Hardware & Ladybug Florists. Or should that and the 519 go too?
Last edited:
SP!RE
°°°°°°
WOW. We owe it to the developer to throw out support behind this one... looks like a beautiful project, and continues the excellent precedent set by FIVE St. Joseph:
SOURCE: Raw Design
SOURCE: Raw Design
Rowe
Active Member
I knew it! This one has been on RAW Design forevvverrrrr. I saw it when Hume was talking about this firm's design of a car dealership.