[maestro]

I like the look of the restored facades on 65 King Street East. Four individually constructed buildings were still destroyed. Facades are a sales pitch. Mentioning them in the context of 18 Elm is not fully grasping what preservation means,. This is 140 year old, Romanesque YWCA that would qualify as an A should Ontario have a grading system like everyone else does. An A grade is hands off for any sort of modern alterations.

Chicago's inventory of pre WW2 buildings is incomparable to Torontos. New York has demolishes towers that would make most of us here weep.They still have the greatest inventory of untouchable buildings in North America.

 

[Northern Light]

I like the look of the restored facades on 65 King Street East. Four individually constructed buildings were still destroyed. Facades are a sales pitch. Mentioning them in the context of 18 Elm is not fully grasping what preservation means,. This is 140 year old, Romanesque YWCA that would qualify as an A should Ontario have a grading system like everyone else does. An A grade is hands off for any sort of modern alterations.

Chicago's inventory of pre WW2 buildings is incomparable to Torontos. New York has demolishes towers that would make most of us here weep.They still have the greatest inventory of untouchable buildings in North America.

Just for clarity, the original building here was demolished a long time ago, this is already a facadectomy today.

But I still don't like it, as I think the new overbears on the old, diminishes it.

 

[Paclo]

Application Details

www.toronto.ca

Resubmitted with the following changes:

• Storeys increased from 39 to 44
• Height increased from 134.09 to 151.74m
• Total residential units decreased from 258 to 247
• Total bicycle parking decreased from 291 to 276

Massing / design changes relating to the heritage addition / cantilever, from the planning report:

• an increased setback of the reveal from the west property line; an increased setback of the tower from the west property line (which also provides separation to the future park);
• alignment of the reveal with the ridges of the existing roof;
• and modifications to cantilever of the new addition, including its overall height and the addition of a series of small steps.

 

[Northern Light]

Still a hard 'no'.

That's all.

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

Still a hard 'no'.

That's all.

Would making that tower right side up be more satisfactory?

 

[christiesplits]

That's a No from me.

 

[Northern Light]

Would making that tower right side up be more satisfactory?

It couldn't hurt.

But I still think a new build here is just too intrusive to the heritage; I don't know that you could make it otherwise, but if you could, it would surely be much smaller and probably not interesting as an investment.

 

[YIMBY519]

How would you build something like this? It is a logistical nightmare. Crane pad installation, crane logistics and location in general, hoist would need all sorts of expensive runbacks, material, equipment staging and truck access considering the area and adjacent streets. Gives me the shivers.

 

[J Martin]

As if 8 Elm wasn't bad enough. This building could be held up as an example of the fall of Western Civilisation. This is pure, disgusting developer greed. Sell 18 Elm, go out to a single family street in Scarborough and buy the entire block. It will cost the same amount of money. Then you raze all the single family crap, and build a twelve-storey, Euro-style midrise on the entire block. You will cram in twice as many homes, they will be twice as large, the build will be cheaper, and you will make 50% more money.

 

[innsertnamehere]

That assumes people want to buy a condo on a random residential street in Scarborough... they don't.

 

[Northern Light]

That assumes people want to buy a condo on a random residential street in Scarborough... they don't.

While generally true; that could be changed. The built-form, streetscapes/public realm and transit are not immutable.

It would represent better planning to re-think certain 4km2 patches of Scarborough (major arterial to major arterial), not levelling everything, but removing bungalows on main streets, plowing a new E-W main street through (so they're 1km apart) etc etc.

The City/Gov't would have to lead..........but developers could easily be on-boarded once you get some heavy lifting done.

 

[ProjectEnd]

As if 8 Elm wasn't bad enough. This building could be held up as an example of the fall of Western Civilisation. This is pure, disgusting developer greed. Sell 18 Elm, go out to a single family street in Scarborough and buy the entire block. It will cost the same amount of money. Then you raze all the single family crap, and build a twelve-storey, Euro-style midrise on the entire block. You will cram in twice as many homes, they will be twice as large, the build will be cheaper, and you will make 50% more money.