AlbertC
Superstar
Easton's means that the IBI Group will probably be the architectural firm of choice here. With Emblem aiming for 40 storeys at their nearby 250 King East site, I can see Easton's asking for something similar.
Toronto 185 King East | 157.12m | 46s | Gupta | Arcadis
- Thread starter AndreaPalladio
- Start date
DSC
Superstar
Member Bio
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2008
- Messages
- 18,595
- Reaction score
- 25,271
- Location
- St Lawrence Market Area
Not to worry anyone (including me!) too much but I see "they" have painted a sign in the "lane" behind this building to mark an up-coming bore hole drilling. Often the first stage in preparing plans to build. This 'lane"
AlbertC
Superstar
Easton (Gupta) Group as per this thread:
urbantoronto.ca
179-185 King St E (Eastons, ?s, ?)
According the Lobbyist Registry the above properties are in play. Easton's Group of Hotels Inc has retained a lobbyist for this site. Details for Subject Matter Registration: SM32291 Decision(s) or issue(s) to be lobbied 179-185 King Street East, Toronto...
RonThom
Active Member
DSC
Superstar
Member Bio
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2008
- Messages
- 18,595
- Reaction score
- 25,271
- Location
- St Lawrence Market Area
Last week they were drilling INSIDE the building at King & George - I assume doing more investigation on the underground 'geography' and exactly where the rock begins. Something is clearly afoot! I would say the question will be, how much of the Listed block on King is involved. I foresee a facadectomy.
Northern Light
Superstar
Application for this one is in to the AIC:
app.toronto.ca
* Docs are Up *
For the title: Height is 33 floors; Architect is:indeed, IBI.
@DSC called the facecectomy here.........I feel like more substantial retention should be considered for this site; and ABG; a new important planning principle, Anything But Gupta.
Just to illustrate the bulk of this thing:
Sigh, shakes head................no retail-at grade, all taken up by the Hotel entrance and the condo entrance:
From the Planning Rationale Report:
Comments: To quote the great architectural philosopher, known to some as @ProjectEnd : "Trash"
I mean save and except for the facade retention there is nothing to redeem this and I can't even envision negotiating this to 'acceptable' never mind 'good'......
- Loss of Heritage
- No retail at-grade
- No street trees proposed on either frontage
- All existing trees lost
- Clunky, overbearing design which would be charitably described as 'bland'.
Application Details
app.toronto.ca
* Docs are Up *
For the title: Height is 33 floors; Architect is:indeed, IBI.
@DSC called the facecectomy here.........I feel like more substantial retention should be considered for this site; and ABG; a new important planning principle, Anything But Gupta.
Just to illustrate the bulk of this thing:
Sigh, shakes head................no retail-at grade, all taken up by the Hotel entrance and the condo entrance:
From the Planning Rationale Report:
Comments: To quote the great architectural philosopher, known to some as @ProjectEnd : "Trash"
I mean save and except for the facade retention there is nothing to redeem this and I can't even envision negotiating this to 'acceptable' never mind 'good'......
- Loss of Heritage
- No retail at-grade
- No street trees proposed on either frontage
- All existing trees lost
- Clunky, overbearing design which would be charitably described as 'bland'.
Last edited:
3Dementia
Senior Member
Sorry you had to be awake at 4 am for this tragedy.
Another cut and paste from (often lazy) IBI Group working with our favourite discount client. Wrong developer + dozing architects = lost opportunity for a lovely heritage block.
Wake me up from this nightmare when Allied and Sweeny are at the helm.
Another cut and paste from (often lazy) IBI Group working with our favourite discount client. Wrong developer + dozing architects = lost opportunity for a lovely heritage block.
Wake me up from this nightmare when Allied and Sweeny are at the helm.
Blixtein
Active Member
Astonishingly dreadful. Only someone who absolutely despises this part of town could come up with something like this.
dusk
Active Member
This is comically bad. If we let something like this dominate the st lawrence market block there's seriously no hope for us. Since there's no hope this wont happen, lets just hope its 1/10 instead of 0/10.
egotrippin
Senior Member
This building is pure garbage. All they had to do was look across the street to King George Square for an example of a contextual building that blends into the surrounding vernacular. If there's any neighbourhood where context is important, it's Old Town. Especially a stones throw away from some of the city's biggest landmarks (St. Lawrence Hall, St. James Cathedral).
jxmith_
Active Member
Area definitely needs a hotel, though this feels like an odd spot for one. Maybe it’ll feel less sleepy in 10yrs when Corktown station is running. Nothing to write home about design wise. Let’s see whether they can get it built before the Distillery hotel.
Doppleganger
Active Member
This is appalling. A project flaunting a complete lack of sensitivity to the district's existing heritage structures and with little to no contribution to this areas charming street level character. If this proposal(or any other similar ones) can get approved in the heart of one of the city's newest Heritage Conservation Districts then it signals that Toronto is not really interested in preserving its past.
Last edited:
syn
Senior Member
Horrific.
A random tower with no relation to anything below it.
Can we just leave this block alone, or at the very least update/restore what's there?
Not surprising, sadly, for a city that does such an awful job with its own history.
A random tower with no relation to anything below it.
Can we just leave this block alone, or at the very least update/restore what's there?
Not surprising, sadly, for a city that does such an awful job with its own history.
Justelena
Active Member
ML555
Active Member
How is it still possible to remove retail and not replace it? (Rhetorical)