Toronto

Trattoria Nervosa Expansion | 18m | ?s | PARTISANS

PMT

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 13, 2016
Messages
2,898
Reaction score
4,826
Location
Turanna
75 YORKVILLE AVE
Ward 27 - Tor & E.York District

►View All Properties

Site Plan Control application for a 4-storey (15.7 metres plus mechanical penthouse) restaurant with a 4th floor outdoor patio. The front portion of the existing building is proposed to be maintained.
Proposed Use --- # of Storeys --- # of Units ---


Applications:
Type Number Date Submitted Status
Site Plan Approval 17 116415 STE 27 SA Feb 13, 2017 Under Review

Renderings:
upload_2017-2-16_15-9-59.png


upload_2017-2-16_15-10-23.png
 

Attachments

Northern Light

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
3,874
Reaction score
3,404
Location
Toronto/EY
Absurd!

Defeats the point of preserving anything historical at this location.

If you one wishes to argue for removing a heritage property (designated or otherwise) because a replacement is so wonderful that the trade is worth it; I'm open minded.

But don't argue for keeping some bit of heritage and then decimating its value with a completely incongruous development that looks like some of worse design from the '70s.
 

interchange42

Administrator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
21,935
Reaction score
15,985
Location
by the Humber
Why does it defeat the point of preserving anything historical at this location? How has its value been decimated with the incongruous development beside it? Yes the new building is absurd, yes it's incongruous, but as we don't have a fully intact historic setting here, then we already have a scene of urban incongruity. The original building still has its charm. The new building audaciously adds some serious swagger. It's nicely insane.

42
 

UrbanLurker

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 5, 2015
Messages
97
Reaction score
343
As a casual observer, I think the incongruency is part of the charm. But heritage preservation aside, the living green wall they are proposing here on the mechanical level and against 69 Yorkville looks promising. Hope they don't scratch the idea like 1 Bloor West. The tree on the 4th level looks a little ridiculous though...
 

Northern Light

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
3,874
Reaction score
3,404
Location
Toronto/EY
Why does it defeat the point of preserving anything historical at this location? How has its value been decimated with the incongruous development beside it? Yes the new building is absurd, yes it's incongruous, but as we don't have a fully intact historic setting here, then we already have a scene of urban incongruity. The original building still has its charm. The new building audaciously adds some serious swagger. It's nicely insane.

42
I suppose its all in the eye of the beholder.

But to me this corner still has the illusion of a more historic place, with many of the newer properties paying some kind of homage
in massing, scale, and details to the buildings of an earlier era.

Granted, some of them do a terrible job; and this street is far from pristine.

But to me, appreciating the historical, particularly when its not of the 'grand' variety is about material palate, and scale and the 'feeling' of being
in a more heritage-oriented space; a more human-scale place.

To me this looks completely different than that, it creates added and inordinate to context height, viewable up close, at street level, in a way that diminishes
both the charm of the original building, but also the whole street vibe.

It feels like a Frankenstein grafting of incoherent parts.

I'm not in any way opposed to the modern or audacious, I just don't think there's any shortage of tasteless, flavourless, dull buildings in our City, in areas lacking any historical vibe
where this might fit in well.

Just not there or other similar spaces, of which the City has so few.

If I could draw an allusion, it would be to the surviving heritage buildings at Gerrard/Bay.

They feel completely out of place, and most of their charm and character is lost by what surrounds them.

At some point, saving the historical is no longer worthwhile if you're going to eviscerate its context and flavour.
 

interchange42

Administrator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
21,935
Reaction score
15,985
Location
by the Humber
I suppose its all in the eye of the beholder.

But to me this corner still has the illusion of a more historic place, with many of the newer properties paying some kind of homage
in massing, scale, and details to the buildings of an earlier era.

Granted, some of them do a terrible job; and this street is far from pristine.

But to me, appreciating the historical, particularly when its not of the 'grand' variety is about material palate, and scale and the 'feeling' of being
in a more heritage-oriented space; a more human-scale place.

To me this looks completely different than that, it creates added and inordinate to context height, viewable up close, at street level, in a way that diminishes
both the charm of the original building, but also the whole street vibe.
If you check out Google Street View, you'll see the blank brick wall of the Minto building to the east looming over this. It could be argued that this expansion reduces the oppressiveness of that brick wall…

And in terms of street vibe, it can be argued that the bold architecture amps up the vibe.
It feels like a Frankenstein grafting of incoherent parts.

I'm not in any way opposed to the modern or audacious, I just don't think there's any shortage of tasteless, flavourless, dull buildings in our City, in areas lacking any historical vibe
where this might fit in well.

Just not there or other similar spaces, of which the City has so few.

If I could draw an allusion, it would be to the surviving heritage buildings at Gerrard/Bay.

They feel completely out of place, and most of their charm and character is lost by what surrounds them.

At some point, saving the historical is no longer worthwhile if you're going to eviscerate its context and flavour.
The point here is the juxtaposition. Down at Gerrard and Bay, you have the accident of leftover, marooned heritage buildings. (And they're fine there, they just need a little more love.) This conversely is very deliberate, treats the heritage building in a saucy way, and challenges the sensibilities of its viewers. This is about being playful, not sombre.
The old house looks like it's about to get crushed. Ideally, you want a respectful balance and harmony between the new and old.
You want a respectful balance and harmony between old and new if that's your end, if that's you goal. That's obviously not the goal here, so you employ different means to achieve a different end.

Sure, if every building erected was aiming to embody elegance and beauty, harmony of the constituent parts is what you want. Here we have a a restaurant called Nervosa, and like their name, they want something different for their architecture, something edgier. They got it.

42
 

jje1000

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
3,877
Reaction score
1,403
Strangely enough, I like the weirdness of it, and the way all the parts are interlocked- the existing building isn't that important so there's some leeway in playing around with it rather than sticking to the orthodoxy of keeping old and modern apart.

The terrace will be great in introducing a sense of multilayering in activity and make the surroundings seem more lively and interesting.
 

junctionist

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
8,210
Reaction score
1,289
Location
The Junction, Toronto
You want a respectful balance and harmony between old and new if that's your end, if that's you goal. That's obviously not the goal here, so you employ different means to achieve a different end.

Sure, if every building erected was aiming to embody elegance and beauty, harmony of the constituent parts is what you want. Here we have a a restaurant called Nervosa, and like their name, they want something different for their architecture, something edgier. They got it.

42
That's a goal of heritage preservation--to respect and dignify old buildings that are culturally or historically significant. It's about keeping history alive through the great buildings of previous eras. Balance and harmony matter between the new and the old, so that heritage buildings have the same dignified presence they had when they were built. A good example is the Bloor Gladstone Library, where the new and the old stand next to each other in a harmony achieved through scale and massing. Neither overpowers the other.

Restaurants come and go. Heritage buildings are supposed to span generations.
 

interchange42

Administrator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
21,935
Reaction score
15,985
Location
by the Humber
Or here, where a modern addition is meant to span a Victorian.

Restauranteurs come and go. 200 years from now when Nervosa closes its doors, there will still be a funky building here for another food replicator to move into.

42
 

Irishmonk

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 29, 2007
Messages
1,780
Reaction score
580
Location
Hanoi, VN
I like this plan because it's something we haven't seen before. I'm tired of the same boring sh*t repeated over and over and over again in this city.
 

ADRM

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 2, 2015
Messages
4,165
Reaction score
8,354
From the latest GYRA newsletter:

GYRA received notice from the architect that the renovation is on hold for the time being per the owner’s instructions, but they hope it will proceed in the near future.
 

ProjectEnd

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
8,431
Reaction score
8,218
From the latest GYRA newsletter:

GYRA received notice from the architect that the renovation is on hold for the time being per the owner’s instructions, but they hope it will proceed in the near future.
Well that makes one of us...
 

Top