[jman]

Is the L shaped lot that Tom Jones is sitting on all one property, or are we talking multiple owners here?

 

[DSC]

Is the L shaped lot that Tom Jones is sitting on all one property, or are we talking multiple owners here?

The large block of King/Church/Colbourne and Leader Lane is divided into many separate properties according to the City property map:

This current Zoning Review proposal is for "Proposed building will encompass lots 71-95 King Street East" - this is all the buildings between Leader Lane and Church Street and, despite supposition above, this project would appear to exclude 65 King which is the tiny parking lot at the corner of Leader Lane and King right beside the King Edward. Where the Freed sales centre is being built is 101 King and Freed seems to own this lot, the one south of it down Church - which is actually called 60 Colbourne on the City map - and the first lot (or two) along Colbourne. (#60 and #70 Colbourne.) There are four other Colbourne lots shown on the City map, #40, 46, 54 and 56 Colbourne Street. Tom Jones is at #40.

I do not know how (or if) one can actually find a listing of property owners but even if one can I bet that one owner could, and often does, actually own a whole block using a different numbered company for each.

 

[cdr108]

Just throwing it out there, but isn't it possible that this project does not, infact, involve significant retro-fits or the demolition to the historic buildings? May this simply be an error? The parking lot is large enough on its own to be a development parcel.

i dont think the parking lot is big enough, however, maybe this development will go the way of 5ive St. Joseph

 

[Automation Gallery]

91 King St. E (47s)

91 KING ST E
OPA / Rezoning 12 145905 STE 28 OZ Ward 28
- Tor & E.York Mar 29, 2012 --- --- --- ---
Rezoning application to permit the redevelopment of the lands for a new mixed use building, 47 stories in height complete with a four storey podium component. 355 dwelling units and approximately 9,000m2 of non residetial uses are proposed. 213 parking spaces located in a below grade parking facility are also proposed.

 

[fedplanner]

Nice find! This area of town could use some height. Although, there is a decent building occupying 91 King St. E. I hate to see facadism. Maybe its for the parking lot behind?

 

[whatever]

Forget it. That's the Albany Club. I can't see that ever getting through council.

 

[androiduk]

Are these seperate buildings or did they change the game?

http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/showthread.php/18379-71-95-King-East-%2821s%29?highlight=91+King

 

[Automation Gallery]

Forget it. That's the Albany Club. I can't see that ever getting through council.

Yeah, i cant see them touching the building...my guess is at the rear of the building

Some info on the structure.......The Albany Club took title to ownership of the property at 91-93 King Street East in January 1913. The building remained in much the same condition and appearance as it had when it was first leased, until major alterations and a four storey addition to the rear of both units was added. Charles J. Gibson, a Club member since 1898, was the architect. Gratton Ltd. was the general contractor and Barnes and David Ltd. supplied structural steel. The plans provided for the present dining room, a basement below and two floors above it. There were seven bedrooms, each with a bathroom on the third floor, served by an elevator. The classical detailing of the limestone façade included the frontage at the 91 and 93 King Street units of the building with all window openings remain where they had been originally. The dining room addition and its interior is representative of Gibson’s careful attention to detail and understanding of the need for a grand room in the Club. It is as impressive today as it was in 1930.

In the last seventy years there has been very little change to the main architectural features of the façade and floor plan of the Albany Club. The interior has been adapted a number of times to meet contemporary needs of members. In the 1960’s building, and fire code requirements were incorporated when the facilities were renovated. The third floor bedrooms were altered to accommodate meeting rooms and lounges and a billiard room was located on the fourth floor. Later the upper floor became the Sandwich lounge. In the 1980’s general improvements were made, ventilation updated and finishes renewed.

Now in 2000 as they observed in the 1880’s, the Albany Club “is understood to be strongly and exclusively conservative in it’s tendencies.” The heritage has been sustained as the Club enters a second century of occupancy in the historic building at 91 King Street East.

William N. Greer
Architect & Heritage Consultant
http://www.albanyclub.ca/About-Us/Architectural-Comments.aspx

 

[fedplanner]

Are these seperate buildings or did they change the game?

http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/showthread.php/18379-71-95-King-East-%2821s%29?highlight=91+King

I'm going to assume that it's the same development and will occupy the parking lot in the rear. We'll probably end up seeing something like this:

 

[Ramako]

I'm going to assume that it's the same development and will occupy the parking lot in the rear.

I'm hoping that the proposed 4-storey podium is an indication of this, given that most of the current row of heritage buildings on this block are 4 storeys.

 

[Mongo]

If this is indeed a FIVE / Massey Tower style project, is it too much to hope that MOD Developments might also be the developer?

 

[innsertnamehere]

Am i the only one surprised by the fact that it has 9000m2 of non-residential use? Thats a lot of retail or offices.

 

[Ramako]

Am i the only one surprised by the fact that it has 9000m2 of non-residential use? Thats a lot of retail or offices.

Perhaps evidence that they will indeed be preserving some commercial heritage buildings, a la Five Condos.

 

[Northern Light]

Maybe I'm missing something here; but isn't the 'rear' of this site, the development site for '60 Colborne'?

IF so, where is all this room for building behind the heritage properties on King?

Maybe I'm not allowing for the lot depths or I'm just confused, I will gladly accept enlightening.

 

[Ramako]

Maybe I'm missing something here; but isn't the 'rear' of this site, the development site for '60 Colborne'?

IF so, where is all this room for building behind the heritage properties on King?

Maybe I'm not allowing for the lot depths or I'm just confused, I will gladly accept enlightening.

60 Colborne will be on the eastern most portion of the block which is currently a parking lot.