Toronto 316 Bloor West | 121.14m | 37s | State Building Group | Kirkor

Uptowner said:
Not a surprise, I guess. I think as long as they get 30 storeys they should be able to get 40+ for the first northern corner of Spadina and Bloor to be redeveloped and then maybe 50 for the one after that. Not as many new people in the area as one might hope for but it’s a start.
Click to expand...

That's way beyond what the City is interested in having at Bloor and Spadina. I'm only intuiting from the presentation last week, but I think they'd be looking at around 25 storeys or so here and willing for around 30 at either corner at Spadina, give or take a couple floors, and even those numbers will have nearby residents upset still. (Less so than 42 of course.) Every project is fought for on a metre-by-metre, floor-by-floor, shadow-by-shadow basis, so throwing around total floor numbers in batches of 10 is not really recognizing the degree of scrutiny on the proposals.

The further you get from Bloor and Yonge, the more the heights are expected to drop. Planning will be able to argue that the City doesn't want anything as tall as One Bedford (32 storeys) this far west. I don't think that the Westbank Mirvish Village project has 29 in the bag for Bloor and Bathurst necessarily either. Don't underestimate the power of residents groups, city council, and planning policies. Cases still have to be argued in front of the OMB and not every developer gets whatever they ask for. Of course the City is starting to settle at the upper limit of their acceptable range in each case to avoid going to the OMB, as they do lose whenever they try to limit the developments too much.

42
 
Other than having a subway station at Spadina, what makes this area so special to have taller buildings over 25s compare to College St where they are under 25s now.

You got University Place (245 College St) at 24s with no real shadow impact on the area, The College Condominium at 15s and Design Haus at 19s (231 College St) for the College area at this time.

I like tall buildings, but not here. 25-30s is the limit.

Be surprise to see Westbank Mirvish Village over 20's at the end of the day.

Height of the building needs to be 1:1 based on the street width or building edge and then step back for the rest of the building. The day of shear walls 100% need to come to an end.
 
"People in this city are so stupid. Nothing wrong with 42 storeys here."

I'm picking out this comment because I wanted to say that stating you feel 42 storeys is appropriate at this site is different from saying people are stupid to believe otherwise.

No, people are not stupid to feel 42 storeys is wrong on this site. There are any number of legitimate reasons to oppose large buildings in general, or more specifically if they impact your or you feel they would impact your property, life, or neighbourhood.

Most of us arguing here have virtually no interest in the site beyond theoretical or conception ideas of what we feel our city or a city should be like. What is more stupid: opposing a building because you feel an exaggerated sense that it will impact the traffic you experience every day because you live on the street, or supporting this building because you feel tall buildings are good and are theoretically better for the city?

For the record I own property in the area and am fine with a tall building in the order of 20-35 storeys as the compromise building will ultimately turn out to be.
 
You got University Place (245 College St) at 24s with no real shadow impact on the area, The College Condominium at 15s and Design Haus at 19s (231 College St) for the College area at this time.
Click to expand...

Mosaic Condos at 736 Spadina is the most recent addition to the area (last 10 years or so) and is 20 storeys.
 
Edward Skira said:
Mosaic Condos at 736 Spadina is the most recent addition to the area (last 10 years or so) and is 20 storeys.
Click to expand...
We can look at King & Spadina to see the lower levels for new towers there, though there is a push for taller ones there.

TrckyRicky said:
For the record I own property in the area and am fine with a tall building in the order of 20-35 storeys as the compromise building will ultimately turn out to be.
Click to expand...
You owning property in the area as stated, but do you live & work in the area??? You are looking at the bottom line when buildings do have an impact on people in the first place. The taller they are, higher the land cost becomes down the road.

If you want these tall building, then there should be zero parking requirement for them. Visitors can use the green P for parking. You can have a few share parking spots, but in the end you need to rent cars when you have to travel at a far cheaper cost than owning one.

Traffic impact on everyone in one form or another and time to think about the feet and cycles who use these street as well, considering cities were built for people, not the cars. Cars are not going to disappear for sometime.
 
Uptowner said:
That article had no information on the scale of the project. Do you know about anything in it that will upset residents as much as you imply? I wasn't quite sure how to interpret your comment.
Click to expand...

Well, I guess I don't know what exactly upsets residents so much... Height? Densification? Change in general?

UTS is staying put, though the article sounds like they are still working on a written deal.
I believe they are to be concentrated into the east end of the existing building... They don't exactly have that many students to warrant occupation of the entire existing complex (in fact, OISE currently uses much of the space, as does the department of sociology). The beautiful, central auditorium would likely be demo'd to make way for new U of T developments.
 
Last edited:
drum118, I was not advocating for or against the building so my comment was not really about the bottom line. If anything I was defending the legitimacy of the people voicing arguments against the proposed building even though I do not have a strong opinion either way.
 
Interchangee42,

Thanks for the perspective. I don't doubt that the alternate path you lay out is more likely. I just hope something really special is proposed that will allow for a significant exception.

Student99,

Thanks for writing that out as I hadn't heard a peep about it. I wonder if we will hear anything by the end of the year.
 
I would be very sad to see the UTS auditorium disappear. Perhaps there could be a deal providing more frequent and easier access to community groups needing the space. The auditorium is the best feature in the building, IMO. By the way, IIRC, there was once a shooting range beneath the auditorium. I doubt it is still used!
 
State Building Group has appealed to the O.M.B. the City's failure to make a decision on this application within the 120 day period allotted for review.

42
 
Tonight

Bloor Corridor/Annex Block Study Stakeholders Meeting

The City is holding a Community Consultation meeting where you can learn more about this application, ask questions and share your comments.


Details are as follows:

Date: June 23, 2016

Time: 6:30 pm – 8:30 pm

Place: University of Toronto Schools, Auditorium, 371 Bloor Street W.

Proposal

City Planning staff is currently undertaking a Bloor Corridor/Annex Block Study of the properties on the north side of Bloor Street West, between St. George Street and Walmer Road, to clarify the (Bloor Corridor Vision Study), Area Specific Policy 334 and assist in assessing the appropriate height and massing for the proposed development at 316 Bloor Street West and adjacent blocks in the Spadina Node and Institutional Precinct on Bloor Street West.

You can view background information at: www.toronto.ca/planning/bloorannex
 
ProjectEnd said:
What is the point of specifically including 316 Bloor in this? The proposal is already before the OMB.
Click to expand...

316 Bloor application spurred a closer look at this stretch of land (it's that and the United Church proposal right now). I think this node of two subway lines is relatively lower density compared to other nodes in the city. Not sure how OMB would react to that. Anyway, I bet ARA is concerned this node starts looking like Yonge & Bloor and are hoping to be a bit more pro-active.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top