allabootmatt said:
Am I the only one getting a bit queasy about the extent of development pressure in the Entertainment District? The blocks along King between University and Spadina are already great and have lots of potential. I would hate to see that squandered.
Click to expand...

You're not alone. This is really unsettling.

MBS said:
how could you think development is a bad thing?
Click to expand...
I don't think anybody is "against development". As ganjavih said, the problem is development that seems to be completely unchallenged by any significant, considered planning efforts.

MBS said:
I remember when people said the lightbox would kill the King st strip and id say it's now better than ever!
Click to expand...
Not really. The problem isn't the Lightbox, it's the Festival Tower -- a compromise completely out of character with its surroundings that gave precedent to all these other towers being built in a neighbourhood full of lofty midrise turn-of-the-century brick & beam remnants of the former textile industry. There's no reason why these couldn't be the same height as the Freedville condos. It's the same neighbourhood. It's the same market. It's the same distance from everything. It's not as though we didn't have great examples from other cities of how and how not to handle neighbourhoods like this.
 
Last edited:
grey said:
You're not alone. This is really unsettling.

I don't think anybody is "against development". As ganjavih said, the problem is development that seems to be completely unchallenged by any significant, considered planning efforts.

Not really. The problem isn't the Lightbox, it's the Festival Tower -- a compromise completely out of character with its surroundings that gave precedent to all these other towers being built in a neighbourhood full of lofty midrise turn-of-the-century brick & beam remnants of the former textile industry. There's no reason why these couldn't be the same height as the Freedville condos. It's the same neighbourhood. It's the same market. It's the same distance from everything. It's not as though we didn't have great examples from other cities of how and how not to handle neighbourhoods like this.
Click to expand...

Festival Tower, in it's current incarnation, wouldn't exist today if it were not for the massive condo tower on top. For good or bad ...
 
The noted compromise could have been executed in a different manner.

The trouble with the building is that, in the eyes of all subsequent developers and the OMB, Festival Tower set a precedent. Now everyone wants the same height. Once the empty lots are gone, the existing building sites will be developed. This has already started.
 
Luckily for individuals in this city that are having a hard time dealing with tall structures
they set the precedent at a height of 157 meters (which is pretty average nowadays) and not 200 meters.
 
taal said:
Festival Tower, in it's current incarnation, wouldn't exist today if it were not for the massive condo tower on top. For good or bad ...
Click to expand...
Yes, an exception was made. The problem seems to be that the master plan with respect to heights is thrown out the window once a precedent is set.

Automation Gallery said:
Luckily for individuals in this city that are having a hard time dealing with tall structures
they set the precedent at a height of 157 meters (which is pretty average nowadays) and not 200 meters.
Click to expand...
How does that help? 157m is still a tower. As long as they've blown the plan and built towers here, I don't see the point of limiting their heights, aside from shadowing. It's too late.
 
Last edited:
From DCN......Nice to hear that, the heritage buildings that currently exist on site will be conserved:)

CONDOMINIUM, RETAIL
Proj: 9143849-1
Toronto, Metro Toronto Reg ON

PREPARING PLANS
323-333 King St W, M5V 1J5
$25,000,000 est

Note:
Owner is currently seeking rezoning approval. Schedules for design, tender, and construction will be determined once approvals are in place. Further update late fall 2011.
Owner's Representative will not accept unsolicited phone calls.

Project:
proposed construction of a 39-storey condominium consisting of a 3-storey podium and a 36-storey tower. There will be retail on the ground level and a total of 201 residential units. The heritage buildings that currently exist on site will be conserved.

Scope:
200,176 square feet; 36 storeys; 6 storeys below grade; 201 units; parking for 114 cars; 1 acres
Development:...New
Category:...Apartment bldgs; Retail, wholesale services
 
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/02/08/city-to-oppose-39-storey-king-west-tower-at-omb/

City to oppose 39-storey King West tower at OMB

Peter Kuitenbrouwer Feb 8, 2012 – 7:17 AM ET


Toronto city council on Tuesday unanimously approved a motion that authorizes the city’s lawyers to oppose, at the Ontario Municipal Board, a developer’s efforts to build a 39-storey tower on King St. W. along Restaurant Row.

The tower, 323-333 King St. W., west of John Street, could still rise in some form, however. The motion includes an amendment written by the local councillor, Adam Vaughan, which requests city planning staff “continue to work with the applicant on the basis of revised plans to be submitted, with the objective of reaching a settlement on an acceptable form of development.”
Click to expand...
 
From what I recall, the management of Le Germain and owners along restaurant row were not terribly sympathetic to this proposal due to the proximity, height and immense demand it would make on the service lane way.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top