Toronto 137-141 Isabella Street | 231.55m | 69s | Pinedale | BDP Quadrangle

N

Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
31,903
Reaction score
89,523
Location
Toronto/EY
The Lobbyist Registry tells us Pinedale is looking to put this property along with the adjacent 141 Isabella in play.

The site currently houses a 7-storey rental building, and a seeing heritage house that is neither listed nor designated.

Streetview:

1709047907193.png


Adjacent 'heritage':


1709048047698.png

Aerial Pic:

1709047679138.png


Site size is ~1700m2 or about 18,500ft2

Comments: This one should come as no surprise..............the nominal precedent is the ask next door at 135 Isabella (not yet passed by Council) where the applicant is seeking 69s.

Thread here: https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threa...7m-69s-kingsett-capital-bdp-quadrangle.35919/

This site is physically large enough to accommodate a tower form, though it may be constrained somewhat by separation distance requirements with abutting owners. Currently, nothing would prevent a proponent here from demo'ing the 'heritage'

Were they to do, it would be a bit easier to get the right footprint for a tower; though if the choice was to preserve the facade only of the said building, there's still lots of room to play with; where the site is a bit more constrained if the majority of the heritage were retain in-situ.

To the east of this site is surface parking currently associated to the older rental building at 540 Sherbourne. There may be implications for that site; there is also a hydro substation right at Sherbourne/Isabella. Clearly necessary infrastructure, but I'm not sure what Hydro's long term plans are for this 1-storey structure.
 
Let me confirm something about the scale here; the concept is ~800 units.

That is very similar to 135 Isabella, the thread for which I linked above.
 
Surely there has to be some thickness of concrete that would allow for that substation to be moved into the basement of a new tower
 
The substation and parking lot I have long thought were prime to go, I’m surprised the rental towers have had applications first.
 
stjames2queenwest said:
The substation and parking lot I have long thought were prime to go, I’m surprised the rental towers have had applications first.
Click to expand...

The parking lot belongs to 540 Sherbourne with a single level underground garage beneath it. As for the substation, it wouldn't surprise me for it to be there 50 years from now surrounded by a forest of vacant 70 storeys towers. It's owned by a crown corporation. There's no pressure to go through the hassle to relocate it and underground for a few million profit selling it for redevelopment. I don't think we'll have to wait long to find out. 540 Sherbourne will show up in the application info centre sooner than later.
 
Well, this didn't take long:

www.toronto.ca

Application Details

www.toronto.ca www.toronto.ca

Architect: BDPQ

Height: 69s

Not much to work with render wise, but here we go:

1709717198283.png


1709717736160.png


Site Plan:

1709717256619.png


Ground Floor Plan:

1709717302395.png



1709717360258.png


Elevators: 7 * (6 above podium). Ratio: 117 units per elevator or 0.85 elevators per 100 units.

@Paclo is flagged.
 
TossYourJacket said:
Somehow the "bicycle parking" sign above the doorway is killing me. It's like they're trying to be like "please don't hate the ugliest part of this render" 😆
Click to expand...

You know what, you're precisely on point!

Looking at it, it doesn't require much investment to improve either.

1) Align the height w/the property next door, pretty please. (We're talking the one-storey bit)

2} Blank walls are bad, put a window, if there's a compelling reason you don't want people to see inside, make the glass opaque or one-way.

3) Do something with the @#$# roofline of this bit............I don't mean super fancy overly whatever, just not nothing, top of height always needs a coda. It can be a cornice of some description, or it can be a railing or something else entirely, but something, it reads as an unfinished thought.
 
The last time Pinedale built anything this big was in 1972. I think you are expecting too much.
 
Unfortunately, it looks like another Charles Street East condition is shaping up here. No guiding vision for the broader city block, just a bunch of parcel by parcel developments with a tower on a podium, none of them having any real regard for each other. The whole will never be greater than the sum of its parts.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top