Panontario said:
Here:
http://urbantoronto.ca/news/2012/10/interview-era-architects-heritage-five-st-joseph

In this interview posted back in October, the developer clearly says that:

1. "GS: Yes [, plan to totally gut them] Right now the floors in there are wooden and wonky, and at different levels because of the slope of street. We'll put in steel floors with concrete pads on top."
2. "Q: Is it even a situation where you were able to salvage and reface any of the wood floors? A: No, based on what's left it’s not worth it"
3. "The upper floors on the Yonge Street buildings' size might be nice, and might get great light, but the question was how to get access up there, how to get elevators in, second exits. There are currently too many stairs to get up, and they don't conform to today's code. A lot of those things don't necessarily work when you look at the buildings on an individual basis.
GS: So, we are putting the entrance to those upper floors on St. Joseph, so that area it will have its own lobby and elevator, similar to the 'Five Thieves' at Summerhill and Yonge."


~~ please tell me how that's not complete rebuild with "only facades and some minor structural items will be left, remainder will be completely rebuild from scratch" as I have previously posted. So maybe you can consider a possibility that you are not always right...
Also, please read my original post. I did not say that entire building is going to be demolished. Only that majority of the building will be rebuild from scratch, indicating that there is no way they can open retail portion by this fall.



one last quote regarding garage:
"Q: Will the garage extend all the way to Yonge?
GS: No, in the original design it came close, but it has been scaled back to preserve more of the Yonge Street buildings."
Click to expand...

So really this is a matter of semantics. When someone says "demolish and rebuild" (even even with your caveat of "facades and some minor structural... left") I imagine you taking most everything down to the ground. Hard to ascertain you didn't mean rebuilding everything save for the Yonge Street frontage. At bare minimum I suspected you meant something similar to what was done with the warehouse on St. Joesph.

If the perimeter walls and roof of a building remain standing, even with extensive interior renovations, I don't consider that a "demolition" of said building.

the plan is to demolish and rebuild most part of those Yonge Street buildings
Click to expand...
 
Xray_Crystal_Junkie said:
So really this is a matter of semantics. When someone says "demolish and rebuild" (even even with your caveat of "facades and some minor structural... left") I imagine you taking most everything down to the ground. Hard to ascertain you didn't mean rebuilding everything save for the Yonge Street frontage. At bare minimum I suspected you meant something similar to what was done with the warehouse on St. Joesph.

If the perimeter walls and roof of a building remain standing, even with extensive interior renovations, I don't consider that a "demolition" of said building.
Click to expand...

Sure... Let's just leave it at that, and get back to discussing the Five. The bottom line, Yonge St houses will undergo a major structural transformation that would take time to accomplish. Hence, there is no way for retail to open any time soon.
 
Since we are getting all technical - the point I was trying to make is that the structures will remain standing.
 
Torontovibe said:
WOW, think of how exciting the retail will be on Yonge Street, with all the new condos going up. We will have quite the collection of banks, dry cleaners, Subway sandwich shops, lots of Starbucks and maybe even a Tim Horton's if we're really lucky. Isn't that what they call "destination retail"? No wonder everyone wants more new condos in this city. I wonder if they'll all be glass walls too? How charming will that be.
Click to expand...

After all these Yonge Street condos are built, they should change the name of the Downtown Yonge BIA to "Downtown SBUX, Tim Ho & co" BIA.

What a bore--the suburbanization of Toronto continues :p
 
picard102 said:
As opposed to the exciting collection there previously?
Click to expand...

I would much prefer what's there right now, over what seems to be going into most condos. If you think more banks and Starbucks will improve Yonge Street shopping, you're wrong.
 
Torontovibe said:
I would much prefer what's there right now, over what seems to be going into most condos. If you think more banks and Starbucks will improve Yonge Street shopping, you're wrong.
Click to expand...

Right, more internet cafe's and pizzerias are what will save it.
 
While banks don't tend to move once they've gone in, other spaces won't necessarily be what they were two years after opening, and may well turn over after six months or a year if they aren't successful. It can take a while to get the right tenant mix in the retail spaces. I too hope the remaining retail spaces are taken by more interesting retailers/restauranteurs (and sure, wood oven pizzerias, why not?), but they may not all be the first retailers in any particular spot. Here's to the developers finding some good ones first time though!

42
 
urbandreamer said:
After all these Yonge Street condos are built, they should change the name of the Downtown Yonge BIA to "Downtown SBUX, Tim Ho & co" BIA.

What a bore--the suburbanization of Toronto continues :p
Click to expand...

exactly in which suburbs do you find a bunch of starbucks?
Or do you think all the PizzaPizzas or Gold exchanges makes Yonge st so "urban"?

I know you tend to prefer things stay as they are, but Yonge st north of Dundas is hedious and it is gonna change. Nothing can stop it.
 
Don't we have options other than cheap pizza and dollar stores on one end and Starbucks and banks on the other? Clothing/shoe stores, restaurants/decent pubs, sporting goods, jewelry stores, food related stuff, art dealers etc... I mean there must be dozens of categories of retail that offers that mid-grade price-range that the area needs, and can probably support. My issue is not with the bank and the Starbucks per se (people need money and coffee, I guess), but the fact that developers tend to be very reluctant to take chances with the retail mix in their developments. Better to go with a safe, long-term corporate tenant than an interesting business proposal than may fail in 6 months. It would be nice if the developer could chime in on why they went with the retail they chose.
 
bleu said:
exactly in which suburbs do you find a bunch of starbucks?
Or do you think all the PizzaPizzas or Gold exchanges makes Yonge st so "urban"?

I know you tend to prefer things stay as they are, but Yonge st north of Dundas is hedious and it is gonna change. Nothing can stop it.
Click to expand...

The only "urban" that can be attached to Yonge St. without turning the statement into a joke is "urban decay." Yonge St, as it stands, is by far the biggest piece of crap in the whole city. It's sad that people actually want to preserve crap. Heck, I'd support a motion to turn Yonge into a city dump; at least then we won't have tourists judging our city based on it. Oh, and if city council had interests besides view vistas, shadowing, and skyline tapering policies, we could actually completely reinvent Yonge without making it "boring." (interestingly enough, what some perceive as "boring" is actually convenient and increases quality of life for nearby residents, but that's a whole other discussion)
 
Last edited:
DtTO:

It's even sadder when one confound heritage gems and 75 stories hideous crap - other than rehashing terms like vistas and shadowing without understanding any of it. And weren't you warned not to troll along such lines at the Ice thread?

http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/showth...ntre-(Lanterra-57-67s-aA)?p=720824#post720824

And yes, speaking of vistas, I am sure you must be *real* familiar with the crap that happened on the Bay St. terminus.

AoD
 
Last edited:
interchange42 said:
While banks don't tend to move once they've gone in, other spaces won't necessarily be what they were two years after opening, and may well turn over after six months or a year if they aren't successful. It can take a while to get the right tenant mix in the retail spaces. I too hope the remaining retail spaces are taken by more interesting retailers/restauranteurs (and sure, wood oven pizzerias, why not?), but they may not all be the first retailers in any particular spot. Here's to the developers finding some good ones first time though!

42
Click to expand...


very good point re: it often taking time to find the appropriate mix. i can envision a hip bar or supper lounge taking over one of the laneway stores on st. nicholas. i think there is enough density with the tower above and the Nichoals up the street to support such a use. the wellesley stuff i am excluding for the moment b/c it will be a while before those projects are completed.
 
AoD, those heritage gems (if they can even truly be considered gems) you speak of not only form a minority of the building stock on the stretch of Yonge in question, but they also don't match the context of the street, given its new surroundings, and its important role in the city. In addition, there are many Victorian buildings in other parts of Toronto, and I'm not talking about houses either. Anyways, I'm not advocating the demolition of every single building on Yonge, I'm just saying that it's incorrect to turn "heritage" into a blanket term that covers everything built prior to 19XX, thus covering nearly the entire street. Buildings should be preserved for architectural merits, and a few other reasons, but the construction date should certainly not play such a large role. Expecting streets to remain the same and keep their "feel" indefinitely, regardless of any benefits that a complete makeover might bring to the city is an example of complacency.

As for the view vistas and shadowing issues, I don't bring those up as a form of trolling, but rather to highlight the (in my opinion) poor prioritization of principles at city hall. There are many ways in which the city can at least guide developers to create more engaging urban spaces. However, (and I challenge you to prove otherwise) the majority of their concerns seem to focus on height, shadows, etc., while completely disregarding design, and street engagement (aside from the occasional traffic quibble).
 
It's funny that people keep talking about the need to "save" what is Toronto's busiest street for pedestrians. I can't think of a better way to evaluate the current state of a street than by the number of people who want to spend time walking on it.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top