RGB_11 said:
Is the bank moving or closing permanently?? Reminder note: If the Spadina & Bloor Scotia Bank does close and not relocate, the current nearest location is @ Dupont & Howland where a new Scotia Bank recently opened.
Click to expand...
I have no idea...one would hope they get some kinda arrangement TD did with E Condos up on Yonge & Eglinton. But beyond this, your guess is as good as mine's...

...I also should mention that I was hoping to troll @Northern Light into saying something about this with my update here. Because I was wondering what's going on here in regards to the local chatter on this too. But Light-san may not be able to say much if anything on this at all. We shall see! 😺
 
Last edited:
d.thomson said:
Apparently there was a motion to evaluate 320-326 Bloor West for heritage value. Anyone hear any updates on this?
Click to expand...

The motion to request such an evaluation passed.

I don't see any record of a follow-on report in the minutes.

Edit to Add: Still seems to be with the City, no sign of an appeal to the OLT.

But no Final Report either.
 
Last edited:
Sooo, over on another thread, I observed with interest that the plan to extend the Spadina Station LRT platform to the east had suddenly been moved up to start as early as late this year.

I wondered about why that came about, good project, but the sudden move way up the priority list........

Twas suggested to me by someone that this project, directly over/adjacent to said loop was going to have some construction impacts on the TTC's asset, and that likely triggered moving the project up so it could all be coordinated.
 
Last edited:
Northern Light said:
Sooo, over on another thread, I observed with interest that the plan to extend the Spadina Station LRT platform to the east...
Click to expand...
...er, silly question time: Is there a reason for extending that east?

(Also: It's weird how all these elements are moving in tandem to assume major redevelopment here, when nothing has been passed yet by The City as far as I am aware. What if they say no? >.< )
 
UtakataNoAnnex said:
...er, silly question time: Is there a reason for extending that east?
Click to expand...

Yes, to allow for 2 streetcars to sit on the platform at the same time. Right now, with the 510 as congested as it is; streetcars are often backed up in the tunnel, with passengers unable to disembark, waiting for the one already in the station to leave.

Also, at peak times, the concourse area in the station is very, very busy, and a bit more circulation space would be helpful.

UtakataNoAnnex said:
(Also: It's weird how all these elements are moving in tandem to assume major redevelopment here, when nothing has been passed yet by The City as far as I am aware. What if they say no? >.< )
Click to expand...

A fine observation; you might infer something there...........
 
Northern Light said:
Yes, to allow for 2 streetcars to sit on the platform at the same time. Right now, with the 510 as congested as it is; streetcars are often backed up in the tunnel, with passengers unable to disembark, waiting for the one already in the station to leave.

Also, at peak times, the concourse area in the station is very, very busy, and a bit more circulation space would be helpful.
Click to expand...
Sounds like they're more widening things up in that extension. But either way, fair enough...

Northern Light said:
A fine observation; you might infer something there...........
Click to expand...
They have secretedly said, yes...but haven't made that public yet? I mean, I can only infer so much with little else to go on...so I resort to guesstimating instead. I hope that's okay!
 
UtakataNoAnnex said:
They have secretedly said, yes...but haven't made that public yet? I mean, I can only infer so much with little else to go on...so I resort to guesstimating instead. I hope that's okay!
Click to expand...

There are no UT rules against 'guesstimating' so it's all good. :D
 
The south-facing units in this building will have an insane view down Spadina, I wouldn't mind being an end user in this area tbh
 
This one was at the City Design Review panel on May 4th, 2023.

Link to recording:

Some slides/notes from the above:

1683652951981.png


Denoted above is the ground floor plan, notable here is as follows, the bright white is the extend of the building at-grade, the outer lines show the cantilever over Bloor/Spadina

The black dots shown between the open space in the N-S lane at the east end of the building indicate bollards to protect from vehicle intrusion; but the intent is for the loading area to be 'woonerf-style' and usable for pedestrians to connect to the rear/north E-W walkway which will encourage cut-throughs to Madison/Spadina or between those 2 points.

1683653208736.png


1683653358712.png


Of note above is the red dashed line which is the Spadina LRT track underground, one can now see why the TTC is attempting to coordinate work with this development to expand the platform to the east, as the track literally runs under their ownership footprint.

****

In the Q & A questions raised included:

Will the park in the north-west (Paul Martell) be separated from the lane by a fence? (it is currently). The applicant would like the fence removed and the park and lane integrated, but that will be up to Parks.

Will the overhang impact wind conditions for pedestrians? Answer TBD.

Is the floor plate reasonable? (837M2); the City is leaning towards the idea it ought to be smaller, but have not yet taken a position on which side(s) the tower should be pulled back.


***

Panel Discussion:

Proposed columns - design may overly encumber at-grade environment; another panelist used the word 'overbearing'.

Discussion of the Woonerf - proposal to the east would feature loading and a blank wall up against this Woonerf, that will seriously impair this being a desirable pedestrian space.

One panelist argued for revisiting the proposal for the site to the east to remove the parking so that the mid-block connection could be made a viable space.

Discussion of northern walkway, covering it will make it dark.

Skepticism over whether Parks would consider removing the fence next to an area designed to allow trucks.

Much being made from many panelists that the tower is too stout looking and needs sculpting.

Also criticism of too many architectural expressions.

Two panelists arguing against the parking (27 spaces) which is primarily visitor. The number was dictated to occupy a single level.

Dislike for the way cyclists will access bike parking.

Upgrades to cycle tracks should be integrated into the design.

Not much love for the existing 'heritage' storefronts which most here like well enough but feel it makes sense to remove them entirely.

8 members, unanimous vote 8-0 non-support.
 
Last edited:
As someone who currently runs a business out of 324 Bloor, I am wondering if anyone here can offer me an informed guess about when construction on this project might begin?

We currently have a lease with a demolition clause requiring First Capitol to give us 6 months notice proir to our eviction. But is that likely to come next year, or in 2 years, or in 5 years? Any thoughts?

I would love to hear from anyone who might be able to give me a real sense of what this timeline might be.
 
Applegate said:
As someone who currently runs a business out of 324 Bloor, I am wondering if anyone here can offer me an informed guess about when construction on this project might begin?

We currently have a lease with a demolition clause requiring First Capitol to give us 6 months notice proir to our eviction. But is that likely to come next year, or in 2 years, or in 5 years? Any thoughts?

I would love to hear from anyone who might be able to give me a real sense of what this timeline might be.
Click to expand...

A lot sooner than 5 years.

The TTC budgeted to begin work as soon as this fiscal year, which ends March 31 '24.

I suspect that's optimistic in light of what the Design Review Panel had to say, above.
 
Northern Light said:
Everyone is entitled to their own perspective on aesthetics.

While UT'ers will vary; I think you'd find a relatively positive vibe about the tower here which has some warmer tones, and greater visual interest than most.
It's certainly not a plain box, for better or worse.

I think it would certainly be fair to question how the ground level is structured.
As yet, I'm not persuaded that the design is ideal from the perspective of retail animation.

*****

While some here would not agree, I do sympathize with the take than the Annex area, along Bloor, from Walmer to Front largely reads quite well.
It's a busy shopping area with a reasonably diverse mix of independent and chain retail, a decent little food scene, and yet meets the needs of locals as well.
I can understand a concern that that may be threatened by a proverbial wall of towers.

But I would suggest to you, that some degree of intensification is both desirable; and can be beneficial to the community.

That to the extent one wishes to strike a balance, the height should be focused near the major intersections (Subway Stations) at both Spadina and Bathurst; and the key is simply to do one's best as much as the planning process allows to ensure quality development, rather than opposing it outright.

I think you'll find that outright opposition won't be successful in any event, therefore, simply as a pragmatic choice, you'll better served to lobby for the best version of a tower, rather than none at all.
Click to expand...
exactly it's sloppy urban design. Bad aesthetics. No one is against intensification but we must demand better urban design. Londoners do and they get it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: max
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top