DtTO said:
+1. Yonge is mostly garbage bungalows that belong in a rural farming town. It's by far the most embarrassing street in the city. The 1 Bloor construction site already looks better than 90% (not all) of Yonge b/w Dundas/Bloor, with its messy signs and sketchy retail.
Click to expand...

It's lined with mixed-use commercial blocks, which are among the basic urban components of Canadian cities throughout central and eastern Canada (and to a lesser extent, the west). On Yonge, many of these blocks are in bad shape and in need of restoration, not demolition. Yonge is also bad shape because for the most part, it lacks streetscape features like trees, patios, ornamental lighting and attractive paving.

If we denigrate these essential 19th century buildings on Yonge Street, does that mean that Queen West's built form of three storey mixed use blocks is also small town rubbish? What about Front Street in St. Lawrence or Bloor Street in the Annex, for instance? Of course that's not the case; the three storey mixed-use block is an essential part of urban Toronto and cities throughout the nation. Toronto as a metropolitan city now builds at least midrise buildings along main streets without heritage guidelines, but where the old urban components exist and work fine, they should be well maintained. Their beauty will come through.
 
junctionist said:
It's lined with mixed-use commercial blocks, which are among the basic urban components of Canadian cities throughout central and eastern Canada (and to a lesser extent, the west). On Yonge, many of these blocks are in bad shape and in need of restoration, not demolition. Yonge is also bad shape because for the most part, it lacks streetscape features like trees, patios, ornamental lighting and attractive paving.

If we denigrate these essential 19th century buildings on Yonge Street, does that mean that Queen West's built form of three storey mixed use blocks is also small town rubbish? What about Front Street in St. Lawrence or Bloor Street in the Annex, for instance? Of course that's not the case; the three storey mixed-use block is an essential part of urban Toronto and cities throughout the nation. Toronto as a metropolitan city now builds at least midrise buildings along main streets without heritage guidelines, but where the old urban components exist and work fine, they should be well maintained. Their beauty will come through.
Click to expand...

/ad copy

Incorrect. Bulldoze Yonge.
 
Lansdude said:
/ad copy

Incorrect. Bulldoze Yonge.
Click to expand...

One of the most grotesquely incorrect statements to ever be posted here.

When was the last time any of you critics actually walked down Yonge street? There are plenty of great retailers along Yonge now, from the like Banh Mi Boys, to Bar Volo, and the the Red Bench, with more opening up all the time, nevermind the increasingly corporate Queen West (between University and Spadina) vibe that's been developing, with all the chains opening up as well, from Menchie's, to the Wine Rack, to more Mcdonald's and Starbucks locations, in addition to developments like that medical office suite that opened up a year or two back, or 401 games moving into their new and expanded store.

Yonge Street is hardly lacking quality retail, nor charm, nor heritage. There are, of course, some retailers that the street would arguably be better off without (most of the ones in the 501 Yonge block, for instance), but such a blanket statement could hardly be applied to the entire stretch of Yonge. Likewise, the exact same point could be made about the built form along Yonge street, whose built form is clearly worth preserving, in spite of the odd building (such as the Le Chateau up by Bloor) that clearly lacks heritage value, so to say all of Yonge Street should be bulldozed is just such an expression of utter wanton, moronic and vacuous ignorance that it barely deserves a response.

As to the point of Yonge st needing more density, it's already busy enough with pedestrians that I'd argue it's actually one of the few major streets in the city NOT in need of more density, as what purpose would more density along Yonge street actually serve when it's already so busy? Which isn't to say that we shouldn't build along Yonge where appropriate, with developments such as One Bloor, Five, or 501 Yonge (massing and architectural specifics aside), just to say that to view the lowrise nature of Yonge as being indicative of the need for more density is to be equally ignorant of the currently existing realities of the street.
 
^ Yonge St. is in need of high rise density. Before you start calling me a skyscraper geek or whatever, consider why Yonge is in such a bad shape; the tax base and property value is much lower than other areas of downtown. High rise construction would alleviate this, and would actually give the city a chance to enforce the construction of wider sidewalks without disrupting traffic by reducing the street to two lanes. With the amount of criticism Aura gets, one would think that the area around it must be light years ahead, when in fact, Aura looks better than most of Yonge. Like I said earlier, the 1 Bloor construction site looks better than most of Yonge. :rolleyes:

As for comparisons between Yonge and Queen West, I'm guessing that anyone who makes this comparison has never actually been to QW.
 
I think most agree with you on highrise construction along the stretch, but many (including me) would rather not loose many of the historic storefronts along its length. Projects like 1 Yorkville and Five are how highrise density should be added to the street.
 
DtTO said:
^ Yonge St. is in need of high rise density. Before you start calling me a skyscraper geek or whatever, consider why Yonge is in such a bad shape; the tax base and property value is much lower than other areas of downtown. High rise construction would alleviate this, and would actually give the city a chance to enforce the construction of wider sidewalks without disrupting traffic by reducing the street to two lanes. With the amount of criticism Aura gets, one would think that the area around it must be light years ahead, when in fact, Aura looks better than most of Yonge. Like I said earlier, the 1 Bloor construction site looks better than most of Yonge. :rolleyes:

As for comparisons between Yonge and Queen West, I'm guessing that anyone who makes this comparison has never actually been to QW.
Click to expand...

You're simplifying a complicated history of a particular street and suggesting the solution is tall buildings.. I'm not buying it. Compare Yonge to Yorkville, for example, and there are a number of clear differences leading to the different characters of the area today. For example, BIAs, Yonge has had one since 2001... Yorkville since 1985. Yorkville had a history of galleries and gentrification for decades while Yonge has been a retail strip for decades. A few tall buildings fronting Yonge aren't going to change this unless you bulldoze and evict huge swaths of the street.
 
Yonge St.

innsertnamehere said:
I think most agree with you on highrise construction along the stretch, but many (including me) would rather not loose many of the historic storefronts along its length. Projects like 1 Yorkville and Five are how highrise density should be added to the street.
Click to expand...

Totally agrre with you opinion.
The only thing is , that the street is already changing in a big way and a lot of highrise projects are in a pipeline for better o for worth...
 
Back in July Council did approve a motion to revitalize Yonge south of Davenport. I'm not sure if it's related to the Yonge Street Planning Framework that Councillor Wong-Tam proposed back in 2011. Regardless we should be seeing significant positive changes on Yonge in the near future.
 
Automation Gallery said:
What, 5-10 years?...isn't that what it usually takes to get the ball rolling in this city:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Lol close enough.

But seriously, I hate how long things take to get going in this city. In other places in the world, you could announce a massive subway project and in less than 6 months shovels will be in the ground. Here in Toronto, we'd be lucky to get a sidewalk fixed in 6 months. And for a subway it takes 5 years of studies, EAs and politics before we can start at least a decade of construction ;)
 
^EAs take 2 years and are needed for good reason, to ensure the best alignment is chosen that minimizes environmental impacts.
 
Pic from today November 6th. The one crane comes about 20 feet from my desk when it swings around.

IMG_7779.JPG
 
Hawc, since you have the prime seat, how the third floor coming along? Hopefully we'll get couple of more floors by the end of this year.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top