250 King East | 139.5m | 43s | Emblem Developments | IBI Group

bjrkz

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 14, 2019
Messages
56
Reaction score
151
The owner of Betty's is actually thankful that this development came around. It will allow them to re-open after the pandemic and remain open for another few years. If not for this development, the owner said they would've never re-opened after March.

After this is complete, Betty's will be moving locations just down the street to Leslieville.

Here is the source: https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/beloved-bettys-bar-could-make-way-for-40-storey-condo-tower
Thanks for linking that article. I’m glad that Betty’s has found a new location but I don’t think this is a sustainable development model moving forward - like Matti Siemiatycki states in the article.
It seems like the city is losing many of its institutions to condos and there’s little effort from developers and the city to include these businesses in new developments. When they try, it’s often done poorly like Graywood’s proposed condo at 510 Church around Crews and Tangos or the Sneaky Dee’s proposal which was basically a slap in the face to its patrons.
I agree that “we can’t freeze cities in time” but I don’t think the solution is to say that businesses, like many residents, are to move further out of the downtown core if there isn’t a space for them. There should be better efforts to include existing businesses into new developments, especially when they’re neighbourhood establishments.
 

thrillho

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 20, 2020
Messages
20
Reaction score
38
Thanks for linking that article. I’m glad that Betty’s has found a new location but I don’t think this is a sustainable development model moving forward - like Matti Siemiatycki states in the article.
It seems like the city is losing many of its institutions to condos and there’s little effort from developers and the city to include these businesses in new developments. When they try, it’s often done poorly like Graywood’s proposed condo at 510 Church around Crews and Tangos or the Sneaky Dee’s proposal which was basically a slap in the face to its patrons.
I agree that “we can’t freeze cities in time” but I don’t think the solution is to say that businesses, like many residents, are to move further out of the downtown core if there isn’t a space for them. There should be better efforts to include existing businesses into new developments, especially when they’re neighbourhood establishments.

Not a problem. Sorry, I just don't share the "condos ruin everything" narrative. People complain about affordability but also complain when more condos go up. The only way to make the city more affordable is by adding more housing supply.

As for losing our institutions, I don't agree with that either. I've lived in Toronto my whole life and seen many condos go up. I don't think anyone can say with a straight face that we have fewer restaurants, bars, clubs, entertainment, diversity, culture etc than we did 10 or 20 years ago.

NYC and Tokyo are very dense cities and it's not as if there are only condos, Starbucks and that's it in those cities.

Businesses open and close, that's the nature of the beast. I can't guarantee that Crews and Tangos will be there in 10 years, but I can guarantee we will have more restaurants, bars, public space, etc in the future than we do now. Not to mention better infrastructure and public transportation. The new people who move in will want places to go and things to do.

Anyways, not to get side-tracked -- the point is, Betty's will be around in the same location for a few more years, then be moving down the street.
 

dusk

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 14, 2015
Messages
253
Reaction score
593
Wow right over the front of the Tokyo Smoke store.... hah. New notice is going up as we speak.
B2FF3042-0A67-47C6-AE32-E4F643DA4AFE.jpeg
 

EddyMCD

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 29, 2011
Messages
136
Reaction score
153
As someone who lives and owns an east facing unit at 333 Adelaide E. I don't know how I should feel about this. I think I'm ok with it.
 

DSC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
16,127
Reaction score
17,899
Location
St Lawrence Market Area
As someone who lives and owns an east facing unit at 333 Adelaide E. I don't know how I should feel about this. I think I'm ok with it.
You might want to expand on your reasons and how well you think this will fit into the neighbourhood not just how it will change the view from your window.
 

EddyMCD

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 29, 2011
Messages
136
Reaction score
153
You might want to expand on your reasons and how well you think this will fit into the neighbourhood not just how it will change the view from your window.

Well from a personal standpoint I'm worried about daylighting. I looked at the shading studies and this building will kill a bit of my sunlight in the early-mid mornings. Though who knows what the final height will end up being.

In terms of the community, it sucks to lose Betty's but I always assume most low-rise retail in an area like this will go eventually. As much as it sucks, that's a problem with City planners, not the developers. As others have said, I don't think the black brick fits in super well with the neighborhood, but aside from the colour I don't hate the street level facade.

As with any of these developments, they never really add anything beneficial to the local community, unless they're being built on a parking lot. But The city needs more housing, so it is what it is.
 

DSC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
16,127
Reaction score
17,899
Location
St Lawrence Market Area
Well from a personal standpoint I'm worried about daylighting. I looked at the shading studies and this building will kill a bit of my sunlight in the early-mid mornings. Though who knows what the final height will end up being.

In terms of the community, it sucks to lose Betty's but I always assume most low-rise retail in an area like this will go eventually. As much as it sucks, that's a problem with City planners, not the developers. As others have said, I don't think the black brick fits in super well with the neighborhood, but aside from the colour I don't hate the street level facade.

As with any of these developments, they never really add anything beneficial to the local community, unless they're being built on a parking lot. But The city needs more housing, so it is what it is.
Good points and it was clear that the "Bettys Block" was always going to be redeveloped and I'm not sure how City Planners can be 'blamed'. This block has no heritage attributes and if the owner want to redevelop there is really little the City can do except TRY to ensure that the plans are not TOO far off the zoning. (Though LPAT will take care of that, for developers!!) By lobbying one can (with luck) make the changes BETTER, not stopped.

Yes, we DO need more housing but it needs to be spread around - it's ridiculous that there is such low density around subway lines once one get out of downtown! To change all of downtown over to high-rise is NOT the answer as it will (has!) spoiled areas people want to move to because of their charm and few people want to swap a Betty's for yet another nail salon or bigger/better pot shop.
 

EddyMCD

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 29, 2011
Messages
136
Reaction score
153
Wong-Tam is the actual worst. Why even hold a meeting when they can just parrot the same "problems" they have with every building.
 

DSC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
16,127
Reaction score
17,899
Location
St Lawrence Market Area
Wong-Tam is the actual worst. Why even hold a meeting when they can just parrot the same "problems" they have with every building.
YOU could have been among the THEY and could have voiced your opinions. Yes, public meetings do often hear the same things about development proposals, but that may be because the proposals are all the same. I was not at this one but complaints about lack of affordability and shadowing are certainly common, and usually justified. City buiding involves compromises and public meetings allow the public to state their views.
 

interchange42

Administrator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
26,376
Reaction score
32,180
Location
by the Humber
Wong-Tam is the actual worst. Why even hold a meeting when they can just parrot the same "problems" they have with every building.
You blame planners but not developers in an earlier post for things that developers do, and you blame Wong-Tam in this post for repeating what was said by locals. Not sure you're very good at knowing who to blame for what.

42
 

Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
23,114
Reaction score
58,607
Location
Toronto/EY
The usual "welcome to downtown" at tonight's public meeting... location is a 3 minute walk to the new ONTARIO LINE station.


Before you throw all the locals under the bus; did you notice that lack of affordable housing was one of the complaints?

I remain of the view that converts to good ideas are better made through constructive engagement than derision.

That some comments were foolish is fair enough; that's true at every public meeting, in every part of the City; and is more a basis for ignoring some individuals rather than being dismissive of an entire area's residents.
 

Top