thefreak said:
Absolute garbage. Another huge loss for the Toronto night life scene. First Clintons (will it reopen?) now this. U of T students will have no where left to party. Stay strong Dance Cave.
Click to expand...
I can't wait for the city to unveil a new nightlife strategy that just says "what do you mean it isn't fun to go to Shoppers Drug Mart on Saturday night?" Cus that's basically gonna be what we have in terms of nightlife soon.
 
thefreak said:
Absolute garbage. Another huge loss for the Toronto night life scene. First Clintons (will it reopen?) now this. U of T students will have no where left to party. Stay strong Dance Cave.
Click to expand...
shuoldnt be partying anyways because of the pandemic. there are several other ways to enjoy.
 
That "potential music venue" is a joke, right? 2700 sqft and half the audience area is around a corner from the stage.

I actually don't mind this architecturally (though that may just be living here for 20 years has finally lowered my standards to below sea level) but in terms of actually serving the neighbourhood it's in, this is a big step down from what's currently on site.
 
Ward8 said:
This is unfortunately weaker urbanism than is already there. The retail units are shallow and it's a pretty fat strip of main street with only one facade. This would be well suited for the parking lot across the street, but it is a pretty chunky building for the location. The building down the street at palmerston is a shorter version of what we would see in terms of scale and street presence. It's going to be tough for the general public to get behind this one given the attachment to the area. I don't hate the building, but even if a music venue stays it will suck the life out of that corner for at least a decade. It would be much better to change the building code so we could see these lots developed individually.
Click to expand...

I agree the facade could show more variation, particularly at the podium level.

The overall building presentation, some flaws aside really isn't bad.

I'm amused to see the mixed reaction with some heaping praise and others calling it garbage.

I would say, mostly above average but with material flaws.

***

Redeveloping the individual lots would pose challenges that vary (for the smallest, I would suggest it just wouldn't be economic; while some of the larger buildings could up redeveloped but without a larger footprint there are many challenges.

Eliminating parking, eliminates a parking ramp and makes more possible; but if you want an internal garbage room, you need a fair amount of space, plus a lane-way or access configuration that supports the turning movement.

I don't want to see all block-long monotonies in the city.

But at the same time, one must understand the practical limitations of retaining truly small lot sizes.

I think, in the alternative, asking/requiring developers to retain the illusion of small lots in the way they articulate facades would probably be the more practical ask.
 
Last edited:
No way in hell a grungy music club would survive more than 2 weeks in this development.

Maybe an Aroma or Subway.
 
The music venue's footprint is a joke. That's a bog-standard retail unit with a stage. The TSCC upstairs would never stand for this either. If we want to have music venues in Toronto condos, and there are probably some good reasons why we should, then it needs to be creatively thought-out with plenty of buffer zones. It also probably needs a tenant pre-signed in the planning stages. This is not the next Sneaky Dee's or otherwise.
 
No dive bar is going to sign on to the rent of a brand new building. Buildings with a variety of ages are important and one of the reasons why I grimace every time a new build combines so many lots. This case isn't as bad as others, but in my mind, it requires even more thought to preserve a good street atmosphere. Sneaky Dee's won't be around forever, but it doesn't mean we have to accept boring streets.

Northern Light said:
Eliminating parking, eliminates a parking ramp and makes more possible; but if you want an internal garbage room, you need a fair amount of space, plus a lane-way or access configuration that supports the turning movement.
Click to expand...

This is important and I'm more ruthless on this component than most. I'd eliminate all parking minimums among other zoning changes. I also think we put a bit too much pressure on main streets to densify. Other residential areas need to pick up some slack as well. I think a huge piece that we miss in Toronto is making it economical for a landlord to add apartments to an existing building. In this case, all of the lots could cheaply add units without digging a massive hole in the ground. I'd be curious to know, at the end of the day, what is a more environmentally friendly way of adding density.

I suppose this is all more of a commentary on how they city evolves than this particular building. Wish this one would address the corner better...
 
20201212_102246.jpg
20201212_102446.jpg
 
Too tall is the last thing on my mind when I think of this proposal. Rather, I think it looks pretty good overall.

My main issue is that's replacing Sneaky Dees...unless the owners of this project plan to re-accommodate in the retail side of things for the future. I hope they do.
 
The Sneaky Dee's psychedelic skull sign (the one on the corner) should be designated heritage so that when the condo is completed, that sign would remain.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top