People! People!!

What's the big deal? The City should just designate the building and be done with the argument altogether, at which point the building would be clear for preservation and restoration inside and out, and would make a beautiful space for small to mid size offices, to the delight of all. Build the big shiney thing somewhere else.
 
So the interior is not "historic in its form," and yet its form is out-of-date? This is a very confusing argument from someone who's blustering about clarity of thought.
Click to expand...

It's not confusing at all. There is nothing historic about the interior of the concourse. If you'd ever been inside, you'd know that it's a typical '20s - '30s office interior. Small, cramped, not condusive to business as it's conducted in the 21st century. It's not unique, and as you say, is not rare. It's not historic, it's just outdated. There's no justification, under the guise of historic preservation, for retaining it. You've set out an economic, or rather, charitable argument for retaining it, but, again, as you say, there is no shortage of low end office space, which makes your argument completely unpersuasive.
 
I've never seen anyone with such a talent for using so many words to say absolutely nothing.
Click to expand...

Ha, I was thinking the same thing. I just ignore his posts.
 
Build the big shiney thing somewhere else.
Click to expand...

This is the bottom line.

Last I checked, there are still plenty of parking lots waiting for development. If Manhattan can continue to absorb new office buildings without having to tear down the Empire State Building, surely we have no excuse.
 
The Concourse Building is NOT the Empire State Building. And neither Oxford nor anyone else can build on land they do not own.
 
OK, then replace "Empire State Building" with any 1920s or 1930s art deco tower in Manhattan.
 
I find it inexcusable that the only way it seems large new office buildings can go up in this city is if existing buildings are demolished because downtown surface parking lots still hang around and most plots of land near the Gardiner and so close to Union station are being turned into condos.
 
I'd like to see this building saved...


But please stop with the "there are parking lots downtown" arguments. If one does not own the parking lot, they cannot develop it. A property owner has the right the make proposals and eventually develop their property within the rules and regulations that the province and city have set out for planning, building code etc.

A developer can not just walk up the street and say "hey, there's a nice empty parking lot - I'll build my tower there."

Sorry, but it just doesn't work that way.
 
The Concourse Building is NOT the Empire State Building. And neither Oxford nor anyone else can build on land they do not own.
Click to expand...

Of course. But as a planning matter, letting Oxford redevelop this property serves nobody's interest but Oxford.

And for what it's worth, I have been inside the building. It *is* pokey and outdated. For now. But "outdated" has a way of turning into "historic" in the most surprising places. (Ask Michael Tippin.)

Preserving the Concourse in full isn't a matter of charity; it's a matter of respect for the city's history, with direct and indirect economic value.
By writing the building off as low-end office space, you're writing off all its potential worth as a, let's say, "character property."

Character space in a deco building is not interchangeable with other low-end office space. And it is, contrary to what you say, rare. There are maybe three or four buildings of similar scale and quality in all of downtown, and one (on Bay) is bank-owned.

Right now the Concourse encourages economic diversity in the area. One day, it could earn high rents from the large creative sector in this city. Even hip law firms. It doesn't take a ton of imagination. But Oxford, like any conventionally run large company, will only choose that path if they don't have other more lucrative options. Which, sadly, they do.
 
Of course. But as a planning matter, letting Oxford redevelop this property serves nobody's interest but Oxford.
Click to expand...

That's the funning thing about private property, comrade. For the most part, the owner gets to deal with it according to their interests.

Even hip law firms. It doesn't take a ton of imagination. But Oxford, like any conventionally run large company, will only choose that path if they don't have other more lucrative options. Which, sadly, they do.
Click to expand...

Ok, first off, hip law firms only exist on television. Not in reality. Secondly, there are no more lucrative options here. Marginal tenants wanting marginal space pay marginal rents. Oxford is not a charity. It is a business. It's sole reason for existence, like all businesses, is to make the most money possible.
 
"Sorry, but it just doesn't work that way."

Well, obviously, but it should work that way, or least somewhere in the middle.
 
Secondly, there are no more lucrative options here. Marginal tenants wanting marginal space pay marginal rents. Oxford is not a charity. It is a business. It's sole reason for existence, like all businesses, is to make the most money possible.
Click to expand...
it's not that simple - the city has a mandate to protect significant properties, even if that prevents the owner from making the most money possible. if a business can't make money preserving old buildings, that's not the city's problem.

of course, this was approved years ago so it's kind of a moot point.
 
the city has a mandate to protect significant properties
Click to expand...

Could you please explain how the interior of the Concourse Building is significant? The exterior is, of course, and is being preserved.
 
Well, obviously, but it should work that way, or least somewhere in the middle.
Click to expand...

The point is that is doesn't work that way, regardless of what other people with no vested interest in the property may think.
 
^^i've never seen the interior - i was talking in general and not specifically about the concourse.

i'm sure there are ways of preserving the building and updating the interior without plunking a modern tower on top.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top