Toronto 357 King West | 148.13m | 42s | Great Gulf | BDP Quadrangle

In a very real sense, whether you like them or not, the towers concentrated in the area point to the failings of enforcing the city's plan. There was a height restriction in the area at one time, and that has been blown away. Now there is an angular plane recommendation based on the height of Festival Tower. Developers play along for now, but they know that the Secondary Plan and the height regime can be attacked at any time with a visit to the OMB (the Secondary Plan is already under attack). The pressure is now on for the west precinct of King-Spadina. The height limit of 28 metres has been surpassed on a number of new buildings and the character of the area is at risk as a result.
I'm suprised that this proposal is separated less than 25 metres from M5V to the west (23m proposed ) and Bisha to the south (19m proposed) ... it sure would be lovely to be looking RIGHT INTO someone else's condo building or blank wall RIGHT IN YOUR FACE within a short distance as proposed (19m / 23m)
^That's precisely why I love these proposals--in your face straight up vertical lines, no silly small town podiums here! This area is so close to Bay St--why not embrace big city thinking here? 75 years ago the trend was height--replacing small houses and junky warehouses with 6-10s industrial buildings; I'm certain the original owners would approve of what's happening now!

As long as quality architecture is achieved, this area will look spectacular for years to come!
Just another banal apartment building. No creativity.

As has been said by many different people on many different threads, it is next to impossible to judge a building by line drawings alone. We always need a rendering to have a better idea of this building's appearance. I will not judge this building until I have seen at least one rendering.
^ I have to admit, I like it more now - I only hope the renderings are a true reflection of what gets built.
The proposal for 367-369 would only be about ten metres from the buildings on either side.
ya, I really hope all these people enjoy looking straight into each other's windows and balconies... I cant understand why anyone would buy in such circumstances. The whole point of being up high is to have a view and you certainly dont have (east-west) views here. The other negative is having 3 similarly glass clad buildings butting right up against one another. Glass needs to play off of other materials otherwise it loses its impact and becomes quite monotonous.
Last edited:
From Urbanation


The new look of King & Peter - Relco's 357-363 King, and 2 TAS Design Build sites 367-369 King & M5V Condo:

Indeed 357-363 looks much better in this render, but what a ridiculously tight squeeze for 367-369. On the one hand, I think the street wall for this section of King is going to look impressive at street level. On the other hand, those balconies are way too close for privacy. Although, I suppose that for most investors or owners who bought units in the lower half of M5V, they probably should have known that they were never going to get a unit with a much of a view anyways, knowing what was most likely to happen with the neighbouring lots.

From the render, does it look like 367-369's east wall is right up to the property line and up against the west wall of 357-363? I'm wondering if it looks like there will only be balconies on the west side of 367-369.
I'm not certain if 357 and 367 will meet at the property line, or if there is some separation, but...

The portion of 367-369 King which is above the M5V podium will not have a smooth ride, and there's a good chance it will be rejected altogether. M5V residents will scream bloody murder about having apartments only 10 metres away from them, and as it violates the city's 25 metre separation between buildings by over half.

Meanwhile, 357 King could possibly be designed without windows facing 367 (above the podium levels), but I doubt the owners of 357 would be for it either: they probably want as much flexibility as they can get at this point.