Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
31,254
Reaction score
87,459
From the Lobbyist Registry, we can see that something is contemplated for 415 Broadview.

Details for Subject Matter Registration: SM32437​

'
Decision(s) or issue(s) to be lobbied

Planning approvals for a mixed-use development at 415 Broadview Avenue.


Streetview:

1634751982977.png


Aerial pic:

1634752215354.png


Site Size: 0.2ha/0.5 ac

Heritage Status: Building is listed, but not designated

Other beneficiaries are listed as:

Lifestyle Custom Homes and de Cartier Development Corporation
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Interesting, LCH continues to be fairly active in acquiring new sites to work on. De Cartier appear to be a smaller player, but these two did work together for the St. Leslieville Church Lofts project on Jones:


 
So this is what an iconic crown jewel looks like huh? I never wouldve thought that!

At this point let's just raze all historical buildings in Toronto. I mean if the city doesnt care about its history, and if developers dont care what's the point in keeping these buildings?
 
What the ever living @#$#

Yag!
My exact thoughts! Reminds me of the Toronto version of this project in Boston:

2145_photo.jpg


 
Last edited:
Hey Everyone, my name’s Ryan and I’m the Development Manager on this and other LCH Projects.

I think it may be helpful to give further insight into the background of this project that will (hopefully) provide a bit of ease. LCH is working with the church congregation at St. John's Presbyterian to develop the site. The church congregation will retain a double-height space in a portion of ground floor of the existing church, and residential units would be built above. We are proposing to retain the vast majority of the church façade (aside from the rear portion facing the laneway). The interior of the building would be demolished, with new construction to rise through the roofline. To my knowledge this method of redeveloping a church has not been done before in Toronto, and it will open new discussion about heritage preservation. We believe that the most important heritage attribute to this site is its historical use, and the congregation itself - who would not be able to complete the growing list of repairs associated with the building without major investment.

The concept is inspired by a development in Boston called The Lucas and we have retained the architect of that project, Finegold Alexander, as the design architect for this project. FAA is also overseeing the heritage restoration portion of the 260 High Park project.

At this stage, we have just submitted our first OPA/ZBA application. Everyone on the development and design team would agree it is very early in the process. When we onboarded Finegold Alexander they were extremely excited to get into the nitty-gritty of the design process, however we instructed them not to focus on the design language of the building, more so on the massing, density etc. This is a complex project on a tight site and it is going to be beneficial to get detailed comments from planning, engineering, transportation, the community (whether it's the UT community or Riverdale community) before moving into detailed design development.

Rather than presenting a simple block model showing density, we did add some articulation to show what a modern addition could look like. The rendering that was created was really a replacement for a typical block model that would normally be seen at early stage developments and that we are still 2 years away from a marketing rendering. The intention for this is to be a very high end design.

All that being said I'm looking forward to the feedback. I'm sure there will be some great debate and I'll be following along.

The Lucas.jpg

The Lucas Construction.jpg
 
@RyanD - thanks for the explanation, and thanks for interacting in this and other threads.

I am not sure your explanation gives much comfort, as it is the massing and not the articulation of the design that looks overbearing and odd to me.

I do find the precedent cited, The Lucas, to be interesting and am glad that there is something you are striving towards. That example works better than what I am seeing in the artist renderings posted in this thread, because the residential addition goes vertical from a narrower footprint after mirroring the former church roof, rather than going vertical right off of the existing walls. The residential massing is also pulled back from the historic church tower, rather than pushed right against it. The massing at The Lucas just looks more deferential to the heritage than the one proposed here.
 
Last edited:
@RyanD - thanks for the explanation, and thanks for interacting in this and other threads.

I am not sure your explanation gives much comfort, as it is the massing and not the articulation of the design that looks overbearing and odd to me.

I do find the precedent cited, The Lucas, to be interesting and am glad that there is something you are striving towards. That example works better than what I am seeing in the artist renderings posted in this thread, because the residential addition goes vertical from a narrower footprint after mirroring the former church roof, rather than going vertical right off of the existing walls. The residential massing is also pulled back from the historic church tower, rather than pushed right against it. The massing at The Lucas just looks more deferential to the heritage than the one proposed here.

Indeed - and also the Lucas respected the rhythm of the windows on the church, and generally deferred to the historical buildings. This proposal doesn't seem to do any of that.

Side shot of 415 Broadview:


AoD
 

Back
Top