This is worse. All glass , less preservation, no interest on the Colbourne Street side. blah. On the upside at least something on these parking lots...we/ I have been waiting since Nefertiti for action here!
Looks like the majority of this discussion was conducted in 2012, which I suppose is to be expected since the proposal is from back then. Earlier this year my office signed a lease for a small office in the 95 King East building. I've been assured (however much that is worth, anyway) the following:
The construction won't impact my office, but
Everything WEST of 95 King E. will be torn down between (but not including) 95 King E. to the Tom Jones Steakhouse
After reviewing the architectural plans (PDF warning), I don't quite get how my office won't get impacted if they're looking to build one contiguous building between 71-95 King East. I bet dollars to donuts I'll be receiving a visit at some point from the LL exacting their right to move me someplace else
My guess is façades will be kept as per usual for construction in the area
The 71-95 block doesn't really contain the most beautiful looking storefronts... if I recall, currently it contains (among others) a convenience store and a rug shop, whose storefronts look old and dilapidated. The restobar at 95 King E. is recessed and looks dark even in broad daylight, and the only real nice entrance is the Albany Club, which isn't even open to the public. In my humble opinion, we're better served with a unified building (with the façades maintained, of course) that better matches the new developments on King St. East.
Yes, the thread for the project you're talking about @devnullis here. 91 King East is not part of it, but everything west of it is, so your building will not be affected.
You can check out the database file linked at the top of the 65 King thread page for the latest renderings of what the building is going to look like. (Pretty damn dull unless they just did the pics for a massing study.)