Toronto

155 Balliol | 84m | 24s | Amelin | Kirkor Architects

PMT

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 13, 2016
Messages
2,898
Reaction score
4,826
Location
Turanna
155 BALLIOL ST
Ward 22 - Tor & E.York District


►View All Properties

Zoning By-law Amendment to facilitate redevelopment of the site with a 24-storey rental apartment building (19,880.0 square metres res. GFA) with a daycare facility on the ground floor. The existing 18-storey apartment building on the eastern portion of the site will be retained.

Proposed Use --- # of Storeys --- # of Units ---


Applications:
Type Number Date Submitted Status
Rezoning 18 173481 STE 22 OZ Jun 7, 2018 Application Received
 

Johnny Au

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
4,990
Reaction score
723
Location
Near where the boundaries of North York, York, and
Behind the former, yeah.
It would have been great if the Geneva Centre for Autism could take advantage of the redevelopment to add a walkway between Balliol and Merton.

I work at the Geneva Centre for Autism (actually another building that is owned by that organization at 164 Merton; 112 Merton is just the administrative offices (and main address) of the Geneva Centre for Autism).
 
Last edited:

interchange42

Administrator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
21,939
Reaction score
15,995
Location
by the Humber
The unrelenting greyness reminds me of, well, way too many buildings, but in particular the soaring mistake by RAW for TCHC down at Dundas and River in Regent Park.

42
 

jTS

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 26, 2018
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Not only is it busy, but in cases like this, the city should really consider the applicant's existing buildings. No development approval until you fix the dilapidated mess of high-rise next door. (Not that it matters since everything gets appealed to the OMB and approved.) There are a handful of projects proposed for the area. They should all be required to make a contribution to the existing community, streetscape as opposed to simply allowing developers to capitalize. IMO.
 

ProjectEnd

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
8,436
Reaction score
8,233
I see it's your first post but just note that:

a) The board ("the OMB") no longer exists and;
b) Your desired 'contribution' is already a mandatory part of the planning process in the form of Section 37, DCs, EDCs, Parkland Dedication, etc.
 

jTS

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 26, 2018
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Thank you Project End. Right re the OMB, I should have stated historically - my error. If you are familiar with the street, and the site, the applicant's existing building appears to be falling apart - it's a complete eye sore. Many of the other older buildings in the area have invested in upgrades to landscaping, and at least make an effort to improve how the buildings appear and interact with the community - upgrades to balcony railing systems, etc. Compare the outward appearance of 45 Balliol with that of 155. Both buildings are the same identical design, but managed by different companies; 155 is frankly an eyesore. Why should the city approve the applicant's new project when the applicant cannot take care of what they have on the existing site?
 

ProjectEnd

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
8,436
Reaction score
8,233
Thank you Project End. Right re the OMB, I should have stated historically - my error. If you are familiar with the street, and the site, the applicant's existing building appears to be falling apart - it's a complete eye sore. Many of the other older buildings in the area have invested in upgrades to landscaping, and at least make an effort to improve how the buildings appear and interact with the community - upgrades to balcony railing systems, etc. Compare the outward appearance of 45 Balliol with that of 155. Both buildings are the same identical design, but managed by different companies; 155 is frankly an eyesore. Why should the city approve the applicant's new project when the applicant cannot take care of what they have on the existing site?
I'm familiar with the street, but not 155 in particular. Streetview illustrates two buildings that are in comparably rough shape. I don't think from that I'd put one significantly over another. Perhaps there's detail I'm not taking in though?
 

Top