[Tewder]

Unless someone can clearly explain how their use of "heritage" differs from their use of "old" they really can't make a case for the preservation of anything.

Heritage involves an ongoing connection between people over generations, so I see your confusion. One might argue that in an age of globalization and rapid technological advances where people are feeling increasingly isolated and 'disconnected' that heritage is becoming more and more crucial to our well being. It helps to ground us in the face of relentless change and destabilization.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

DtTO:

The point of designating buildings as "Heritage" is to credit them for being exemplary in their representation of their respective era/architectural style/architect/etc. to be preserved for future generations. When you decide that a whole street must be preserved in the heart of the city's downtown, you cross the line of sensible preservation into complacency and lack of vision for the future.

1) When I said that city hall has "lack of vision," this is exactly what I meant. If this is truly what you think will happen, given a clean slate, on Yonge, there is no use in me arguing with such ridiculousness.

First of all, it is not the whole street - just a section of it, and far from preserving every site. As far as I know, you do not have a monopoly on sensibilities and vision for the future, as mentioned in my debate with you previously. To accuse others of not having a vision when you haven't even bothered to address the documents produced (which is far more substantial an output than your musings so far) is the ultimate in ridiculousness.

2) The picture you posted is ironic, because it does a very good job of representing the before in Regent Park. What did newer development do to that area, and when was the last time we made such massive urban planning mistakes (queue Cityplace jokes...)? I'll wait.

It is even more ironic that you should use Regent Park as an example - considering what the situation before the "before" was. As to massive urban planning mistakes - the jury is still out for Cityplace, Fort York and Liberty Village - the one saving grace they have is they're built on brownfields with little to no preexisting urban fabric.

AoD

 

[AlbertC]

The greatest obstacle for redevelopment along Yonge is the divided land ownership of the commercial buildings. A particular block may possibly have a dozen different owners with varying opinions on selling or not. Land assembly to achieve a desired size of floorplate can be a challenging task that could take decade(s) or left idle depending on market conditions and company objectives. As we've seen in the last few years, several large proposals have already been introduced to the public with plenty more in the pipeline. The CWNA reports of 130 development applications in Ward 27, and I remember Councillor Wong-Tam once said there were dozens planned along Yonge (from the Waterfront to Eglinton).

While large scale redevelopment along Yonge is on the inevitable horizon, there are still important initiatives to consider. Dismissing old buildings as expendable and all retail as junk is a far too simplistic view on the complex urban fabric of Yonge St. Though retail quality can be improved in certain spots, the variation of storefronts needs to be embraced and referenced in future podium motifs. Notable Victorian blocks can also be integrated and contribute to the diversity of streetscapes.

 

[Mississauga Slim]

This is a very interesting discussion, which I would like to continue. But we have got very far off the topic of Aura. Maybe the recent comments could be ported over to the Downtown Yonge thread.

 

[isaidso]

Wipe the slate clean
That's an absurd comparison. Are you really suggesting that starting a new always leads to your ridiculous example? I doubt few on this site are that simplistic or gullible. See below:

The same wasteful and heavy-handed rhetoric that has ruined entire neighbourhoods so many times in the past.

That's akin to saying we must never wipe the slate clean because it will always lead to disaster. If we lived by that logic we wouldn't have our CBD, the Eaton Centre, the Royal York Hotel, Union Station, etc. There is nothing wasteful or heavy handed about recognizing that a building's usefulness has run its course. This isn't even a case of tearing down the last of its kind since hundreds and hundreds of these types of buildings can be found throughout Toronto.

 

[adma]

That's akin to saying we must never wipe the slate clean because it will always lead to disaster. If we lived by that logic we wouldn't have our CBD, the Eaton Centre, the Royal York Hotel, Union Station, etc. There is nothing wasteful or heavy handed about recognizing that a building's usefulness has run its course. This isn't even a case of tearing down the last of its kind since hundreds and hundreds of these types of buildings can be found throughout Toronto.

Except that it doesn't mean we would or should do it the same way today.

And incidentally, re DtTO's fetishizing of Michigan Ave: I seem to recall him in another thread being a bit snarky about other, more Wicker-Park-y-trendy areas of Chicago being a bit too, well, underwhelmingly "Yonge-y" for his taste. And in a way that, well, I wouldn't want to wish his kind of "urban values" upon Chicago, either. Nor would a lot of Chicagoans.

And interesting re this DtTO jag starting out w/his agreeable response to a bleu post--btw/DtTO's "Trump Tower is aesthetically superior to Osgoode Hall" logic, and bleu's "Toronto needs more buildings like the Fairmont Royal York" logic, I think we have the twin poles of vulgar parvenu urban taste in UT, under the pretense that it's "high class" and "enlightened" and whatever...

 

[greenleaf]

From: http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2013.MM33.13

"Councillor Kristyn Wong-Tam, seconded by Councillor Pam McConnell, recommends that:

1. City Council direct the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, the General Manager, Transportation Services and the General Manager, Economic Development and Culture to develop, in consultation with the Waterfront BIA, the St. Lawrence BIA, the Financial District BIA, the Downtown Yonge BIA, the Bloor Yorkville BIA, the Garden District Residents Association, the McGill-Granby Residents Association, the Church Wellesley Neighbourhood Association, the Bay Cloverhill Community Association, the Greater Yorkville Residents Association, the Bloor East Neighbourhood Association, the Collier-Asquith Residents Association, the Avenue Bay Cottingham Residents Association, the York Quay Neighbourhood Association, the St. Lawrence Neighbourhood Association and the local Ward Councillors, a strategy to improve the streetscape and retail conditions of Yonge Street between the lakefront and Davenport Road and report the outcomes to the Toronto East York Community Council for its meeting on October 17, 2013.

Summary

Yonge Street is an important cultural corridor that serves as "Canada's Main Street". The stretch of Yonge from the waterfront to Davenport Road borders on five Business Improvement Areas and ten Resident Associations. With landmark institutions such as the Hockey Hall of Fame, the Eaton's Centre, Yonge-Dundas Square, Ryerson University, the Yorkville shopping district and the iconic intersection of Yonge and Bloor, it serves as the Toronto's downtown core for arts, culture and shopping for residents and tourists alike.

The Five Year Capital Works Plan calls for major utility and road resurfacing work on Yonge Street to take place in 2016. This provides an opportunity to explore commercial improvements that might be made in conjunction with the scheduled construction work to increase the commercial vibrancy of the street and retail experience.

With many different stakeholders in the area, coordinating utility and public realm improvement work will reduce costs and serve to ensure a more streamlined and efficient construction process.

Enhancing the competitiveness and social experience of the downtown core is an essential component of maintaining and improving the economic health of the City. Investments in the public realm drive economic growth and will ensure Yonge Street remains Toronto's premier shopping, dining and cultural destination for the entire region."

 

[greenleaf]

And this: http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2013.MM33.11

Councillor Kristyn Wong-Tam, seconded by Councillor Adam Vaughan, recommends that:

1. City Council increase the 2013 Approved Operating Budget for City Planning, in the amount of $255,000 gross, $0 net, for the purpose of the Historic Yonge Street Heritage Conservation District Study with funding provided by the following contributions:

a. Section 37 contribution associated with the approved development at 94 Cumberland Street in the amount of $100,000 (source account: 220096); and
b. Section 45 contribution associated with the approved development at 75 St. Nicholas Street and 15 St. Mary Street in the amount of $155,000 (source account: XR3028-4500089).

Summary
The Historic Yonge Street Heritage Conservation District (HDC) study area was authorized for study and identified as a high priority study area at the October 2 and 3, 2012 meeting of City Council. The objective of an HCD Study is to prepare research regarding the history, context, themes, development and character defining attributes of the area, to survey and assess all built form and landscape resources, to analyze the cultural heritage significance to make recommendations regarding the cultural heritage value of the area to determine if the study area has sufficient cultural heritage value to warrant the HCD plan(s) and designation.

The objective of the HCD Plan is to provide the framework and requirements for the conservation and management of an HCD in the subject area. The HCD Plan identifies policies, guidelines and procedures to guide change and future development, ensuring that the cultural heritage values, character and integrity of the district are conserved in the long term. If through the HCD Study it is determined that HCD designation is not appropriate for the subject area, an HCD Plan will not be undertaken.

City staff in Heritage Preservation Services (HPS) established a Roster of Qualified Heritage Consultants, and issued an RFQ Work Assignment for the Heritage Conservation District Study for the Historic Yonge Street HCD study area. The cost and related expenses for this study is estimated at $255,000.

The Historic Yonge Street HCD Study and Plan are to be fully funded from secured Section 45 and Section 37 contributions, including funds received from the development of 75 St. Nicholas Street and 15 St. Mary Street (A0549/10TEY) and 94 Cumberland Street (523-2012). HPS has confirmed that these Section 45 and 37 contributions are available for the use of this study.

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

Thanks for that information greenleaf, it's very hopeful news for a very threatened downtown Yonge Street.

 

[bleu]

I fail to see how Yonge/Bloor is "iconic”. Is there anything iconic at that intersection?

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

I thought that too! Aside from Stollerys everything is gone, there's nothing iconic about this corner at all except the terrific breeze on a 40+C day. Hopefully One Bloor will turn out well (or possibly exceed our expectations) and breathe some life back into this area that now dies after 8pm.

 

[mgl]

What's up,with the lights on top of the Met condos? A year ago, the round LED light tower would slowly change from colour to colour. It broke during the winter, getting stuck on one colour for weeks on end. When they fixed it, it started frenetically changing colors without smooth transitions, jerking from colour to colour. To make it worse, some of the panels are out of synch with the others and display different colours. It has been like that for months now. It would be better to turn it off if they're unable or unwilling to fix it properly. I recall this light tower being an advertised feature of the building, but it's just a joke now.

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

What's up,with the lights on top of the Met condos? A year ago, the round LED light tower would slowly change from colour to colour. It broke during the winter, getting stuck on one colour for weeks on end. When they fixed it, it started frenetically changing colors without smooth transitions, jerking from colour to colour. To make it worse, some of the panels are out of synch with the others and display different colours. It has been like that for months now. It would be better to turn it off if they're unable or unwilling to fix it properly. I recall this light tower being an advertised feature of the building, but it's just a joke now.

It got by as part of the art component here, which I don't agree with, and it's called "The Harbinger". The entire LED display is supposed to change colour depending on wind speed but it's been broken since about November. It finally lit up again in about May and has been cycling through colours ever since then but it also freezes up about once a week, presumably the software that controls it needs a reboot (run on Windows 95 maybe?). It's not unlike the the light feature/art component at Trump, it is a joke to allow these.

 

[renvel]

1 bloor St E.

That's one of three that isn't worth preserving, but the rest (the majority) just need restoration.

Show me please at least one major city in the whole world , where the main street in Downtown area so domitated by 1-2 storey structures ( their delapidated state is the different issue ) , which is totally out of scale of everything , what can be accepted for self respected city...

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

Presumably your referring to Yonge Street, there are numerous three and three+ storey buildings too.