Toronto Maverick | 154.53m | 49s | Empire | Arcadis

5 June 2010: I almost got a pizza here, instead I went for a Grindhouse burger down the street. (Very good.)

dsc08697x.jpg
 
Thanks to urbanation's twitter feed, looks there will be 3 highrise condos in a row along this strip--327 King St West (this thread), 355 King St W (the Westinghouse warehouse next door), and now, 357 King St W (the site of the former M5V sales office according to http://www.weblocal.ca/m5v-condominiums-toronto-on.html
M5V Condominiums 357 King W Toronto, ON M5V 1K1
Click to expand...

New condominiums coming to the Downtown West (King St W / Blue Jays) - 327 King (201 units), 355 King (486 units) and 357 King (242 units).
Click to expand...
 
So all the other restaurants will stay ?
 
It looks like they'll be retaining the heritage buildings but turn the Z-Teca building into a residents' entrance:
Click to expand...

Thank goodness. Every time a new condo is announced, I have a heart attack wondering what bit of Toronto heritage will be destroyed next.
 
If the city fought Brad Lamb on his project down the street, they will certainly fight this development.

There has been discussion for quite some time about a King West Conservation District. However, HCD studies can cost up to $100,000 which the City doesn't have. This is yet another issue with the way heritage is dealt with by the City - to make a study so cost prohibitive, we may not see many more HCDs, especially as they are so contentious these days.

Just in DC where they really are strict on zoning, height, scale and how the development appeals to the streetscape. This is depressing and should not happen to this strip.
 
Rebecca - HT said:
Just in DC where they really are strict on zoning, height, scale and how the development appeals to the streetscape.
Click to expand...

You mean they don't have absurd proposals like this in DC?

rez1.jpg


There's a reason why the Toronto aesthetic doesn't grab people... it's a completely unregulated free-for-all for developers who are exploiting the growth of the city to line their pockets. There is no vision, no guidelines, nothing in place to ensure that developments are in line with the goals of the city with respect to aesthetics, heritage, and respect for the public realm.
 
Rebecca - HT said:
Just in DC where they really are strict on zoning, height, scale and how the development appeals to the streetscape. This is depressing and should not happen to this strip.
Click to expand...

Though I don't know whether we should lean too hard on DC as a plannng model, given how exceptional-perhaps-to-a-fault its particular height/scale/zoning strictures are within a N American context--I mean, it serves them well; but somehow, I can't get the notion of Kunstlerian anti-height zealots out of my head...
 
The current proposal is for a 129 m building, with a small 486 square meters floorplate. The tower setbacks from the property lines are 6m to the west, 5m to the east, 3m to the north, and 5.5m from the centre line of the rear lane. The building site has one listed historical building, a modern building and two 30 year old buildings that were built to reflect the heritage brick context of the street . The proposal would retain the façade of the listed heritage building, demolish and rebuild the 'fake' heritage facades, and demolish thenewer structure to create a glass façade for the residential entrance to the building. The treatment of King Street is an attempt to retain the look and feel of 'Restaurant Row'. Servicing would be from an expanded rear lane with parking access through car elevators. Sol Wassermuhl of Page + Steele is the lead Architect on the project.
 
It looks like this one might do a really good job at the ground-level. Not sure what to make of the tower, but if it's actually integrated as well as these images show the base would make up for the tower portion anyways :)
 
Am I the only one getting a bit queasy about the extent of development pressure in the Entertainment District? The blocks along King between University and Spadina are already great and have lots of potential. I would hate to see that squandered.
 
how could you think development is a bad thing? especially when most of the buildings are going up on former parking lots. I remember when people said the lightbox would kill the King st strip and id say it's now better than ever! Development =/= bad. I know real estate, housing prices, etc etc is another thing but that conversation is happening in every other entertainment district thread so lets not do that here too. To be blunt, I dont care - I'm excited about how this area will look in the next 5-10 years. However the design of this particular tower is kinda crappy, so thats a shame. Well, I guess it could be ok if the glass isnt as teal as the renders show. Good thing it wont be visible at any angle from more then a block away :)
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top