I have a front page story up with a few more details, here!

This is their plan for King Street, btw:

212KIngWKingSt1280.jpg


42
 
They're proposing it be a pedestrian mall? Doesn't the streetcar run right in front?

EDIT: Duh. Should have read the article. The rendering is in "festival" mode, i.e. TIFF. At any rate, if it ends up looking like that, it'd be a lot more inviting than it looks currently.
 
Last edited:
That King Street plan is great (IMO) - but it is obv. a city decision on the land-use. Does this imply the city is behind it b/c it is on this rendering? Sorry - just not very knowledgeable on this topic - how should we interpret it?
 
Mr.Tang said:
That King Street plan is great (IMO) - but it is obv. a city decision on the land-use. Does this imply the city is behind it b/c it is on this rendering? Sorry - just not very knowledgeable on this topic - how should we interpret it?
Click to expand...
The City is planning on making permanent changes to King, now that the Pilot is no longer just a pilot. It is too early, however, to know whether what has been rendered above meshes with the City's ideas for the street. That's just Dream and Humbold's proposal at the moment to sweeten the pie, and no doubt they are dangling that rendering as a suggestion for what they would like to see some of the building's Section 37 equivalent funding go to.

42
 
Mr.Tang said:
That King Street plan is great (IMO) - but it is obv. a city decision on the land-use. Does this imply the city is behind it b/c it is on this rendering? Sorry - just not very knowledgeable on this topic - how should we interpret it?
Click to expand...

The City is behind it might be reaching a bit at this point.

I think it's fair to say the developer has had some discussions w/Planning; and that improvements to the public realm along King are under consideration.

The rendering likely represents one possible scenario under development.

I'm not clear what stage of design the King Street improvement ideas are at.
 
cd concept said:
This may be off subject but King St rules when it comes to skyscrapers and now supertalls. Which brings me to saying why is the Relief Line running through Queen St when it should run on King St to serve the hart of the financial district and now entertainment district. Costing cheaper because is doesn't have to zigzag from the railway to Queen but to King Street ,
Click to expand...
King St is already close to Union station that has 7 GO lines. Having the subway line run under Queen will not only serve Queen and King well but also Dundas and Gerrard and all other places in between that are far from Bloor line.
 
Admittedly some pandemic boredom here, and sincere apologies to DREAM and SHoP... but thought I should get in early with this scribble.

That flat roof is begging for some branding and since Toronto is "dreaming" big (some of which is coming true), the marriage of developer and city brands works in an aspirational way (I also have land in the everglades ripe for development).

Also useful way-finding for occasionally lost air traffic.

212-King-West-ROOF-sign.jpg
 
Does anyone think that this rendering's facade and Lobby is actually gorgeous for this city ? But by the time the city gives this developer the run around. The final rendering will probably look cheap to compensate for the delays. This building will probably be developed in 2030 yup !
 
I hope the black cladding stays throughout the design process, it's certainly refreshing to see. I also have no problem with the height here, it fits well in context.
Below is a quick massing model showing the development in context. It will be updated once the architectural plans are made available.

50702881228_fc04e76695_k.jpg

50703704202_68b58b4850_k.jpg
 
cd concept said:
Does anyone think that this rendering's facade and Lobby is actually gorgeous for this city ? But by the time the city gives this developer the run around. The final rendering will probably look cheap to compensate for the delays. This building will probably be developed in 2030 yup !
Click to expand...

No, I'm not thinking that.

I'm also thinking you have no evidence to support that conclusion.

Your post, and other similar posts are borderline trolling.

I hear the same thing again and again without a shred of evidence to back it up.

Edit to add; people are welcome to have an opinion, positive or negative of this or any other development or its appearance.

But this endless slagging of City Planning, including blaming them for matters over which they have no control (aesthetics) is really bothersome.
 
Quite a few new tall buildings are in a north-south line and will block each other from some angles - Union Centre, 160 Front and 212 King W.
 
This wonderful graphic also makes me wonder when the office buildings towards the south of University will start getting replaced by taller office buildings? I don't think we're quite there yet, but I'd imagine anything that isn't heritage and isn't directly behind the Royal York will get upsized in the coming decade or two.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top