There's no way that rebuilding this row would ever produce a result that similar to the current look and feel. Changing the interior would obviously change the program of the building. I'm very worried that the look and feel would be historical facadism, and end up being leased to 'safe' tenants...

i really like the red brick tones of the older buildings. Perhaps it's nostalgia towards Toronto's industrial past.

so much content in this post, i can't absorb it all!

as always a lot will depend on the quality of the finishes, etc but I think this project is stellar. it's at a great location for tower intensification, and the base of the building is highly articulated. i care more about the first few stories than the height of the tower - and in this case...

either keep the existing structure intact, or demolish it completely. there is no point rebuilding the facade and removing the finer details. who builds a 9 storey tower in Toronto these days? i'd prefer something double the height, but half as wide. (I doubt the residents of 1 St Thomas would...

absolutely fantastic. completely agree, midrises along all Toronto avenues please. i also really love how it's a tiny infill projects. most 'masterplanned' condo communities are giant gated communities.

seems to be a lot of Diamonds involved with this project.

Sucks for those townhouses, no southern or western sunlight.

It should be noted that U Condos is not only replacing a parking lot (as it is mentioned in the article) but the majority of Orientation Field belonging to St Michael's College as well.

design of the building is rather lacklustre, especially compared to the developers' Absolute and L-Tower.

I'm undecided if such large terraces/terrazi should be embraced in northern climates. Deep terraces mean that sunlight (not daylight, there's a difference) wont penetrate the unit. South facing sunlight in winter can greatly reduce heating costs.

what's with the 'supertall' demand. i'm all for towers - but why such a push for 'supertalls'. have you ever considered that supertalls compress development into one site, and absorb all new demand into one location. supertalls may very well be the reason that Toronto's downtown is littered with...

why is there such a huge setback on Wellington West? Seems anti-urban. I understand it respects the neighbouring buildings, but it still seems odd to me.

also Graywood and Beaverhall did Europa at College and Bathurst streets together. Which means this is more than their second collaboration.

The tower is alright - but I'm not sure if I like all these developments along Etobicoke's waterfront. I think I'd prefer to have such density along subways lines rather than our parks.