[AlvinofDiaspar]

DtTO:

La Defense exists precisely because they don't want to have skyscrapers in the historical core.

AoD

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

uhhh...Toronto has plenty of examples of streets lined by 1-3 storey buildings. The difference is that Yonge is arguably the most important street in the city. Show me a picture of Tokyo's most important streets, and I guarantee you that they aren't lined by 2 story dilapidated townhouses. Even the cities that value heritage the most, in the European Union, had the sensibility to modernize their main business areas (ex. La Defense, Paris). Nobody's asking to tear down St. Lawerence here. The fact is that Yonge isn't as glamorous as the historians on this site make it out to be, and I'm not only referring to it's current form, but also it's potential with the current massing. It's sad when the city's most important road becomes an area to avoid when showing out of towners around, and I know I'm not the only one with this sentiment.

Why do you keep bringing out-of-towners to Yonge Street if your so embarrassed by it?

Someone on another thread noted that they hoped Aura would re-gentrify the Yonge & Gerrard area (ridiculous) but here's what we can hope for, that the FIVE project (great planning) kick-starts a little civic pride for owners to rehabilitate their storefronts on Yonge Street (not "townhouses"). Imagine many (most?!) of these old buildings freshened up (but not this kind of crap) along this stretch with funky retail, restaurants and retail? What we also need are a few popular clubs or a cinema complex on Yonge between Bloor & Gerrard to bring back some of the nightlife, however unlikely.

 

[taal]

uhhh...Toronto has plenty of examples of streets lined by 1-3 storey buildings. The difference is that Yonge is arguably the most important street in the city. Show me a picture of Tokyo's most important streets, and I guarantee you that they aren't lined by 2 story dilapidated townhouses. Even the cities that value heritage the most, in the European Union, had the sensibility to modernize their main business areas (ex. La Defense, Paris). Nobody's asking to tear down St. Lawerence here. The fact is that Yonge isn't as glamorous as the historians on this site make it out to be, and I'm not only referring to it's current form, but also it's potential with the current massing. It's sad when the city's most important road becomes an area to avoid when showing out of towners around, and I know I'm not the only one with this sentiment.

I know this has been pointed out countless times to you but I couldn't resist, you seriously bring guests to Yonge street ? Why ? I never do, I never recommend it, I'm referring to the part a little bit south of Bloor to about College / Dundas. Why bother ? There are so many other interesting places in Toronto to visit, the only apeal of Yonge is its proximity to the core.


Anyway, I've been noticing, slowly bur surely, Yonge is indeed gentrifying, more restaurants / a couple retail outlets, and quite a bit less dollar / souvenir / cheap clothing outlets.

So I'm sure, 20 years from now it'll be very different, whether you bring a guest there or not is dependent on what they like. So really the only question for us to answer is what sort of street should it turn into. Both in terms of the built form and the type of retail outlets that populate it.

Have you been to Oxford / Knightsbridge / ... instead 2 or 3 other famous Long streets here (many consider the pinnacle of shopping in London for the typical middle class tourist) .... they are nearly identical to each other, and less the architecture, its no different then the Eaton Center ... and again these streets almost mimic each other in terms of the stores and the ordering of them. Its actually very entertaining walking these so called great streets just to find out how boring they are simply in terms of the type of retail that exists ... btw that's not to say London has many more interesting areas, just like Toronto does.

Is that what we want for Yonge ? Personally .... sure ! I wouldn't mind a tall, Queen east of Spadina is already like that, why not have a place to shop other then the Eaton Center, and again, Toronto has a lot of other what I'm sure most of us would consider interesting streets. Honestly to me Bloor street is no different, other then the fact there are many high end shops that I'm sure some find interesting it has no apeal to me, whereas Yorkville proper is different due to the charming nature of the streets / alleys.


So I say, make Yonge == to Bloor, not high end, rather chain retail, and a very well manicured street. Essentially something the typical boring tourist will like. I honestly find tourist who want something off the beaten track (to a certain degree i.e. the Queen W / Kensington / Junction) could careless about the built form.

 

[DtTO]

DtTO:

La Defense exists precisely because they don't want to have skyscrapers in the historical core.

AoD

I understand, but my point is that this specific stretch of Yonge isn't all that unique. We've already built our downtown here. We can't just move it somewhere else. Besides, I'm not sure how much you know about La Defense, but I assure you that the area was not as barren (before it was modernized) as you seem to suggest. Paris decided to scrap everything, and look at the result; a beautiful, contemporary neighbourhood free of diseased, mainstreet-fronting townhouses.

Why do you keep bringing out-of-towners to Yonge Street if your so embarrassed by it?

I specifically said that I *avoid* Yonge when showing out of towners around. I disagree entirely with the Five approach. Yonge needs a completely fresh start, not a littered canvas. There are plenty of historic townhouses outside of the downtown core. We don't have to - no, we shouldn't - save everything.

I know this has been pointed out countless times to you but I couldn't resist, you seriously bring guests to Yonge street ? Why ? I never do, I never recommend it, I'm referring to the part a little bit south of Bloor to about College / Dundas. Why bother ? There are so many other interesting places in Toronto to visit, the only apeal of Yonge is its proximity to the core.

I don't, I avoid it just as I'm sure you do. Still, you can't avoid that area forever, especially since the Eaton Centre and Yonge/Dundas Sq. are very close by, so it's inevitable to have to traverse that stretch of crap. We should be proud to bring people on Yonge, not drag them in the opposite direction. Like it or not, even Aura is 100 times than just about everything on the stretch of Yonge you mentioned.

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

I specifically said that I *avoid* Yonge when showing out of towners around.

You did indeed, my apologies.

I don't, I avoid it just as I'm sure you do. Still, you can't avoid that area forever, especially since the Eaton Centre and Yonge/Dundas Sq. are very close by, so it's inevitable to have to traverse that stretch of crap. We should be proud to bring people on Yonge, not drag them in the opposite direction. Like it or not, even Aura is 100 times than just about everything on the stretch of Yonge you mentioned.

There's nothing wrong with Yonge Street from Dundas to Queen, or if you go further south for that matter - it's a wonderful area, save for the dead zone that Eaton's created when they block-busted the west side in the 1970's to build their mega-mall.

 

[adma]

Besides, I'm not sure how much you know about La Defense, but I assure you that the area was not as barren (before it was modernized) as you seem to suggest. Paris decided to scrap everything, and look at the result; a beautiful, contemporary neighbourhood free of diseased, mainstreet-fronting townhouses.

Hands up, everyone who can't believe DtTO said that unironically.

 

[adma]

Really. "Diseased, mainstreet-fronting townhouses" deserves to be a UT meme. It's just so hilariously pidgin, in a Borat-cum-North-Korea way...

 

[DtTO]

Hands up, everyone who can't believe DtTO said that unironically.

1950:

Now:

 

[adma]

Are you truly presenting that as "good"--well, maybe it is, in a way; but more to the point, are you truly presenting the "before" picture as "bad"? I scarcely see or sense a snakepit of "diseased, mainstreet-fronting townhouses" there--of course, it's hard to tell because it's an aerial; but then again, if you wanted to "convey a point" about ground-level dysfunctionality, you could have used a better shot than an aerial, which actually doesn't make it look half bad at all (underscaled/sprawliness notwithstanding). And conversely, it might be argued that the aerial of the *new* makes it look even less appetizing, in a pubescent's-Oz-fantasy bizarre-laughing-stock kind of way, i.e. most everything that La Defense has been mocked for for a half century is still. very. much. evident. there.

So, now: hands up, everyone who can't believe DtTO presented that particular before-and-after unironically.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

I understand, but my point is that this specific stretch of Yonge isn't all that unique. We've already built our downtown here. We can't just move it somewhere else. Besides, I'm not sure how much you know about La Defense, but I assure you that the area was not as barren (before it was modernized) as you seem to suggest. Paris decided to scrap everything, and look at the result; a beautiful, contemporary neighbourhood free of diseased, mainstreet-fronting townhouses.

Paris has plenty enough to scrap everything - we don't - and massing has nothing do with historical glamour. Besides, it's not like we're so lacking in developable land that we need to scrap everything to build a second CBD (let's ignore for a moment that Y+B isn't that popular a node for business development to start off with, vis-a-vis the current cycle in particular).

And sorry, Yonge isn't the most important street in the city contrary to what the rhetoric has been (and if it is important, it is precisely due to its' history). You really haven't made a case why selective demolition and redevelopment wouldn't revitalize the street - when adding multi-story towers failed to do so for Bay.

AoD

 

[Silence&Motion]

The proof of the pudding is in the eating, and the proof of a good street is how much time people want to spend on it. Yonge street is packed constantly - especially those areas with the so-called "diseased, mainstreet-fronting townhouses". What are the dead areas of Yonge? The ones where those low-rises have already been replaced with skyscrapers.

 

[RC8]

https://maps.google.ca/maps?q=La+Dé...=jrYYvEETE1bJf6dngch8Dw&cbp=12,83.55,,0,-9.03

Wouldn't we all want Yonge to turn into that one day?

*hands up for Adma

 

[Mystic Point]

One could take a wrecking ball to Yonge street south of Bloor down to Dundas and only Spacing Magazine would have a hissy fit. It's disgusting. And I would know as I live less than a block away. Talk about lack of civic pride. The whole strip looks like a Meth Lab.

 

[DtTO]

https://maps.google.ca/maps?q=La+Dé...=jrYYvEETE1bJf6dngch8Dw&cbp=12,83.55,,0,-9.03

Wouldn't we all want Yonge to turn into that one day?

*hands up for Adma

You're right. This is so much better: https://www.google.ca/maps/preview#...1!2m3!1sdnQX9uw-P8qXKwpQ8rBt-g!2e0!7e11&fid=5

[/Sarcasm]

Paris has plenty enough to scrap everything - we don't

This is just it, though. In the case of Yonge, we do. Nothing on that street is really all that unique. One can find many architecturally similar buildings, with similar massing in other areas of the city.

And sorry, Yonge isn't the most important street in the city contrary to what the rhetoric has been (and if it is important, it is precisely due to its' history).

I disagree. Yonge is important simply because of its location.

You really haven't made a case why selective demolition and redevelopment wouldn't revitalize the street - when adding multi-story towers failed to do so for Bay.

By what standards is Bay a failure? Sure, it isn't what it could've been, but it's far from a failure. Anyways, one only needs to look at Cityplace, the Entertainment District, and St. Lawerence to see that development in Toronto has evolved far beyond the simplistic one use model that Bay was built upon. In fact, some of the newer developments on Bay are a perfect embodiment of that evolution; all you have to do is compare the old (ex. ROCP) with the new (ex. Burano).

One could take a wrecking ball to Yonge street south of Bloor down to Dundas and only Spacing Magazine would have a hissy fit. It's disgusting. And I would know as I live less than a block away. Talk about lack of civic pride. The whole strip looks like a Meth Lab.

+1

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

One could take a wrecking ball to Yonge street south of Bloor down to Dundas and only Spacing Magazine would have a hissy fit. It's disgusting. And I would know as I live less than a block away. Talk about lack of civic pride. The whole strip looks like a Meth Lab.

Really? No, really? Disgusting? Not even close. Your point about lack of civic pride with the poor condition of some of the buildings is well taken, but it doesn't begin - or end, at Yonge Street.

You're right. This is so much better: https://www.google.ca/maps/preview#...1!2m3!1sdnQX9uw-P8qXKwpQ8rBt-g!2e0!7e11&fid=5

[/Sarcasm]

Scroll up, and then from side to side. Look at the bones here, imagine these buildings rehabilitated.

This is just it, though. In the case of Yonge, we do. Nothing on that street is really all that unique. One can find many architecturally similar buildings, with similar massing in other areas of the city.

Nothing on that street is really all that unique. That's a brave, however inaccurate, statement. Take a walk down one day and open your eyes. And because we have other similar type stock on other streets is no argument to eliminate or reduce what is there now. Put simply, these streets attract people because they work and make for a pleasant shopping and walking experience.

I disagree. Yonge is important simply because of its location.

It's not as important as it used to be, and not much less important than similar streets like College West, Gerrard East, Queen East/West/West Queen West, Yonge north of Bloor etc.

By what standards is Bay a failure? Sure, it isn't what it could've been, but it's far from a failure. Anyways, one only needs to look at Cityplace, the Entertainment District, and St. Lawerence to see that development in Toronto has evolved far beyond the simplistic one use model that Bay was built upon. In fact, some of the newer developments on Bay are a perfect embodiment of that evolution; all you have to do is compare the old (ex. ROCP) with the new (ex. Burano).

Currently, Bay Street cannot be compared to Yonge Street. Unless your perfect future sees Yonge Street as Bay Street v2.0 in 25 years, which I suspect it does.