So depressing. I walk past this lovely little building most days on my way home. Demolishing the majority of it for another sh*ty condo. There is a massive parking lot at the end of the street. The developers are pretty shameless.
 
I think the design's a little plain, but the fact that we're getting another pencil-thin tower is great. A mixture of large block-spanning towers and smaller ones like this will keep the streetscape and skyline interesting.
 
Mr.Tang said:
So depressing. I walk past this lovely little building most days on my way home. Demolishing the majority of it for another sh*ty condo. There is a massive parking lot at the end of the street. The developers are pretty shameless.
Click to expand...

The developers are the architectural firm that reside within the current property. Maybe business isn't going well.
 
An upscale boutique loft building with absolutely no parking?
This is bound to fail unless parking is available for its residents in the buildings next door.

I love the heritage building and it's a shame that it will be demolished and just it's facade recreated with a banal office tower-like building sitting on top of it.
 
This thing is being built?! I never thought such a freakishly efficiently skinny building could happen here, though I guess it only did because of the O.M.B. It’s Manhattan-like in its use of space, which is great. I really look forward to this, and the density of this area generally.

Also, buildings shouldn’t have parking in this area. It’s wonderful that this is setting a precedent for no parking in such buildings.
 
Mr.Tang said:
So depressing. I walk past this lovely little building most days on my way home. Demolishing the majority of it for another sh*ty condo. There is a massive parking lot at the end of the street. The developers are pretty shameless.
Click to expand...

The parking lot at the end of the street is the future home of King Blue. Different owner, different project. Lament the loss of this building though I do, I'm hoping that this project can be a precedent for developing narrow sites going forward. Enough with the land amalgamation and block-busting, Vancouverist podiums already.
 
milanista said:
In regards to the above reference to Manhattan, I both agree and disagree.

On the infill side, yes I agree, we need more of this. Maybe not in this exact location, as the King/John intersection is already insane, but more of this in general.

On the other hand, it is buildings just like the current existing heritage one that line the neighbourhoods of Chelsea and the Lower East Side that make those areas as charming and valuable as they are. So if one were to fix it up, but retain the structue, it would also be an example of "Manhattanization", just another kind.
Click to expand...

I don't like facadectomies, in general, but that's largely because most facadectomies rip down buildings that are more than just mere facades, usually because they're on a corner with at least two visible faces. In this case, the building is just that: a facade, in the middle of a block. Once the building next door to the east is fully constructed, it would just present one face to the city, and nobody would know about what bones lie behind it. In that sense, I don't mind if being facadectomied. In particular, the skinny 21 storey building is a better - certainly more metropolitan - scale than a 2.5 storey townhome.
 
WOW!!!!

I'm all over supersilms, and this on is pretty good!
The cantilever is very interesting. Reminds me of 225 West 57th Street (the Nordstrom Tower) in NYC.
I'm not to crazy over the facade and the East and West elevations, but the dimensions and slenderness alone will make this building pretty incredible.
 
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT AGENDA

TORONTO EAST YORK PANEL A
Hearing Date: June 10, 2015
Time: 1:30 p.m.
Location: Committee Room 2 - Toronto City Hall - 100 Queen Street West

24 MERCER ST
File Number: A0411/15TEY
Zoning...Site Specific By-law 1081-2014
Ward: Trinity-Spadina
Property Address: 24 MERCER ST
Community: Toronto
Legal Description: PLAN 57 LOT 14

PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATION:
To modify the redevelopment plan for the 17-storey mixed-use building approved under Site Specific By-law 1081-2014 by constructing an additional four-storeys for the purpose of additional residential dwelling units for a total of 21-storeys.
http://www1.toronto.ca/City Of Toro...s/pdf/C/C_of_A_TEY_Agenda_June_10_2015_PM.pdf
 
didnt they originally want 21 storeys? they chopped some off for zoning approval and are going to the CoA to get the original again..
 
innsertnamehere said:
didnt they originally want 21 storeys? they chopped some off for zoning approval and are going to the CoA to get the original again..
Click to expand...

Precisely. Bit large for a minor variance from the approved development no? Not that I am complaining, I don't know what the difference would be from 17 to 21 for this area...
 
Good question! The hearing took place on June 10 regarding adding 4 more floors to the building. The result was…

It is the decision of the Committee of Adjustment to NOT approve this variance application for the following reasons:

• The general intent and purpose of the Official Plan is not maintained.

• The general intent and purpose of By-law 1081-2014 OMB together with the Section 37 Provision is not maintained.

• The variance(s) is not considered desirable for the appropriate development of the land.

• In the opinion of the Committee, the variance requests are not minor and contradict the recent OMB settlement resulting from extensive stakeholder consultation.
​
42
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top